• From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:42:02 +0000

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 17:29:14 +0700
James Clark <jjc@j...> wrote:

> I can definitely see advantages in this option.  I would summarise it
> as:
> 
> - no colons in element or attribute names,
> - except that attribute names can start with "xml:";

What do you lose if you omit this?
reserved xml: xxx ? Use full XML 1.0 (no longer micro?)
What you gain, simpler parse, no exceptions for the learner?


> - there's nothing to stop you having an attribute called "xmlns", but
> MicroXML will treat it just like any other attribute

I.e. no exceptions, simplicity. A plus IMHO


> 
> Big upside: guaranteed to be namespace well-formed; simpler.
> 
> Big downside: some XML infosets cannot be expressed.

If you want that, go use XML 1.0 


> 
> I would be interested to know whether others also find this option
> preferable.

Lose the exception for me James. 
Too little gain for more awkwardness.



-- 

regards 

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: MicroXML
    • From: James Clark <jjc@j...>

• References:
  • MicroXML
    • From: James Clark <jjc@j...>
  • Re: MicroXML
    • From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...>
  • Re: MicroXML
    • From: James Clark <jjc@j...>
  • Re: MicroXML
    • From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...>
  • Re: MicroXML
    • From: James Clark <jjc@j...>