[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
- To: XML Dev <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 16:39:00 -0400
Ron Bourret wrote:
> I agree, although for a different reason. I've just gotten to writing this part
> of the code and have to admit that having to parse something the parser can
> parse for me makes me very grumpy indeed. Note that the EnumerationValue
> element is used by both enumerated attributes and notation attributes.
I also agree. Indeed, it was the asymmetry between NOTATION/enumeration
and the other eight types (which require no ancillary data) that
made Ron & I agree to move them to elements in the first place.
One has to work harder than necessary either way. But the main
principle of XML back-ends is that all parsing should be done by
the parser! There should be no second-level parsers that have
to decipher some embedded syntax.
(This means that I deprecate ENTITIES, NMTOKENS, and IDREFS.)
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org
You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn.
You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn.
Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
