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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Quite a few schemas now have provision for comments, which can do stuff
like import from XHTML or DocBook namespaces. This clearly allows for rich
comments, unlike <!-- --> comments. Does this mean that <!-- --> comments
should be discouraged, except perhaps for "commenting out" bits as a 
temporary measure during development and the like? Is there a semantic
difference between comments on the *information* as opposed to comments on
the markup, which <!-- --> are for?

Not that I urgently need an answer, I was just sitting thinking about it
(can't sleep, y'see)

<!-- --> comments, like <?foo ?> PIs, seem to be one of those bits of XML
that nobody ever uses. At least, I never see them in the coding examples
around here. Oh yeah, and that <!NOTATION > thing is a bit of a pariah,
too... does anybody use entities to refer to stuff in favour of <foo
href="..." />, anyway? The latter seems much more convenient, since it
doesn't require all definitions to be gathered inside the <!DOCTYPE >...


                               Alaric B. Snell
 http://www.alaric-snell.com/  http://RFC.net/  http://www.warhead.org.uk/
   Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software