Lists Home |
Date Index |
We could indeed use a PI, but a special attribute like XML Schema does could
be OK too. It's not rocket science, as you point out. The rocket science (is
it really ?) resides in the document that the PI or attribute points to. It
could be RDDL, but I've written before why I don't think embedded resource
links within human readable doc is a good idea. It could be RDF, and instead
of a PI or a special attribute, we could even have RDF embedded at the begin
of the document, that would point to another set of RDF documents. In any
case, we would need :
- to standardize the way an XML document could refer to the meta-data
catalog : a PI ? a special attribute ? an RDF element with a special
- to standardize the meta-data catalog : RDDL v2 ? RDF ? Something else ?
Note that both RDDL and RDF have a similar notion of listing relation
between resources, the semantics of those relations residing in 'roles',
'arcroles' or property names. In both case, on top of the schema of the
catalog, a set of well-known property names should be defined to represent
DTDs, different schema types, human-readable documentation, stylesheets,
etc. The model should support multiple language for the same
human-readable-documentation role, but this can be done in RDF without
touching the model by decomposing resources in a special way (one anonymous
resource linked as 'human-readable-documentation' which is linked to the
documentation through language-specific relations).
Such a system would provide great benefits :
- associating document for their schemas in a schema-language independant
- associate documentation to the document or their schema
- associate multiple stylesheets (not just one stylesheet per as the broken
xml-stylesheet PI allows) to a schema for different target schemas or
I am trying (on my free time) to define a very, very simple MVC framework
based on XML (the model) and XSLT (the view), simple enough to be
implemented in any language and easily implemented with PHP, ASP, JSP etc.
The purpose of this framework is to be so simple that it could be installed
on low-cost shared hosting computers, only requiring FTP access for the site
author (who would only manipulate XML, XHTML and XSLT files). This way I
could write my whole personal website using XML and benefiting from
server-side transformation, without caring about the language used to
implement the server part, and without having my hosting company install a
full-featured J2EE or .NET application server (which is *not* what low cost
hosting provider want to do). The ability to associate multiple stylesheets
to a schema or document would be of great help there, but I can of course do
it in a proprietary way.
>De : Simon St.Laurent [mailto:email@example.com]
>Envoyé : vendredi 18 janvier 2002 19:18
>À : Nicolas LEHUEN
>Cc : 'firstname.lastname@example.org'
>Objet : Re: TR: [xml-dev] RDDL (was RE: [xml-dev] Negotiate Out The
>On Fri, 2002-01-18 at 12:01, Nicolas LEHUEN wrote:
>> Well, DOCTYPE has always proven useful until now, but it only points
>> DTDs. So why drop the idea ? Pointing to a catalog of
>meta-data files (DTDs,
>> schemas, human-readable documentation, etc.) would be very useful...
>If you want DOCTYPE, cook up a processing instruction that points
>wherever you want and require it to appear before the root element.
>No magic in that. Could even point to a RDDL document, if you wanted.
>Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
>Errors, errors, all fall down!