[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> On Thursday 24 January 2002 10:12 am, Mark Baker wrote:
> > Right. But I'm only interested in the serialized structure, not
> > anything to do with activation and binding with that structure
> > (Bento vs. Opendoc).
>
> I think they're somewhat related though I understand the point you're
> making. Bento was good primarily because it did/assumed very little. I
> assume you're thinking along the same lines?
Yes.
> If so, then this is
> really just going to be another form of packaging. Anything beyond
> this starts encroaching on the application space.
There's definitely some overlap with packaging, but it is not a general
packaging solution. For example, you couldn't package simplified XSLT
stylesheets with this solution, for all the reasons we've discussed
here.
> > That depends. If any subdocument acts as a container, and the
> > element of that subdocument which does the containing is required to
> > be processed (e.g. smil:skip-content="false"), then if a suitable
> > compound processor cannot be constructed, processing must fail.
>
> I think that would depend on the application though.
Ok. But I think that if one were building a general model, that failure
in this situation would likely cover the needs of most apps. Do you
agree?
> > For packaging, I'm assuming a compound document with containment
> > purely by value.
>
> The point I was making is that in the context of a given application,
> dispatch is usually a trivial part of the overall application.
Agreed. I'm not trying to solve world hunger. 8-)
MB
--
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com
|
