Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Joe Lapp <email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 20:51:01 -0500
Yes, mixed content is an issue, which is why I started the "Data Markup Language" thread. You might cast your vote there.
At 05:28 PM 11/28/1999 -0800, Paul Tchistopolskii wrote:
>> I understand the problem better after reading other people's responses.
>> What threw me was the analogy to object data and behavior, which I don't
>> think is the right analogy.
>> In each of these example elements
>> <lineitem quantity="3"><model>XYZ</model></lineitem>
>> <lineitem quantity="3">XYZ</lineitem>
>> 'lineitem' has two properties: model and quantity. It happens that in the
>> last example the model is not labelled 'model'. The label is missing,
>> since strictly speaking XYZ is not the lineitem.
>> If we throw away the quantity attribute we are left with...
>> XYZ may indeed represent the line item, but we could have chosen a more
>> specific word...
>> I'd argue that if an element has attributes in addition to text content,
>> then the attributes together with the content define the element, and the
>> content must therefore be yet one more property of the element. The
>> property simply has not been named.
>.... I think, <PCDATA> could be a name of such a 'hidden property' property ? ;-)
>> You might consider that a shortcoming of XML.
>I don't understand where is a shortcoming here .... I think nobody knows
>for sure what will happen with some 'plain' PCDATA field in the future - it
>may easily become mixed content, so considering PCDATA to be
>a special case of mixed content looks reasonable and consistent to me.
>But I agree, when you have PCDATA but *not* mixed content it usualy
>means that you'l better to specify some new element / attribute ...
>Do I understand your point ?
>I don't understand what to do with such a knowledge ...
>> By allowing attributes it allows elements to have unnamed properties.
>> I'm having trouble interpreting this as an advantage that attributes give.
>> Were there never attributes, every property would have a label.
>> (Unless there is mixed content, which prompts my next thread...)
>> I think the solution for SML/XML conversion is give this property an
>> explicit name.
>What is the *problem* you want to solve ?
><lineitem><quantity>3</quantity>XYZ</lineitem> is valid XML and
>valid SML as well.
>Or I'm missing something in SML ?
>Or you are saying PCDATA should be restricted from SML, and
>only mixed content should remain?
>What is the purpose ? ... Actualy, maybe there is some ....
>I don't want to drop mixed content from SML. It will
>kill the markup abilities and I don't see any reasons why
>it should be killed. Maybe I'm missing something here.
Joe Lapp (Looking for some good people to help design
Senior Engineer and build the Internet's business-to-business
webMethods, Inc. XML infrastructure. We are 100% Java.)
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)