Re: Resource Directory Description Language (RDDL)

["Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>]

"Henry S. Thompson" <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

> > <!ENTITY % NS.prefixed "IGNORE" >
> > <!ENTITY % rddl.prefixed "%NS.prefixed;" >
> > [...]
>
> If I understand this correctly, it is _much_ more complex than
> necessary

Yes, it is. Many people have pointed out that the complexity of the QNames
part of XHTML m12n [1] makes it difficult to implement, including myself
(and apparently you have too [2]). However, I believe that the HTML WG was
correct in laying out this method because the purpose of XHTML m12n is to
be *modularised*, and not to be concise. If you compacted all of the
entities, it would be about 1% of its original size, but then it wouldn't
make for good modularization :-)
If RDDL is to be a modularized family, according to the specification, then
it might as well go by the letter.

[1]
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/dtd_module_rules.html#s_module_na
mespace
[2] I note this line in the specification:-

     "Incorporation of the Henry Thompson/Dan Connolly
      XML Namespace handling process"

What were your suggestions, I can't seem to find them out from lists etc.?

Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
http://infomesh.net/sbp/
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ [ERT/GL/PF]
"Perhaps, but let's not get bogged down in semantics."
   - Homer J. Simpson, BABF07.