OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: power uses of XML vs. simple uses of XML

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
  • To: xml-dev@xml.org
  • Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 12:45:23 -0500

Matt Sergeant wrote:
> ...
> I think you're talking about two different things though. Your
> implementation of detecting the document type by top level tag is only
> valid if the entire document gets embedded, including that top level
> tag. But what if I just want to be able to use the xhtml <ul>, and <li>
> tags - there's no way in hell I want to have to add in
> <html><body><ul><li> just to get my "point" across (pun intended). 

I think that part of Gavin's point is that from an application writer's
point of view, disambiguating the names is a tiny little part of the
much harder problem of making applications where random namespaces
appear together and "just work." If I add a Corel:P to my Office 2000
document, Word isn't going to do anything useful with it. Getting Word
to do something useful with invented tags is the really hard part.

On the other hand, if I have solved the harder problems and am left only
with the problem of disambiguating names, there is a simple, tried and
true approach. You can externally specify that one name is an alias for
another. One additional benefit of the external approach is that you can
implement one to many and many to one name mappings.

 Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus
Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. 
	- http://www.cs.yale.edu/~perlis-alan/quotes.html


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS