[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Thursday 31 January 2002 04:34 pm, Paul Prescod wrote:
> <>Hello world <>Isn't this</> nice</>
>
> After all, attributes are optional! Nobody forces a vocabulary to
> use attributes.
In most systems, you have required and optional attributes. If you
said something along the lines of:
An element is a set of attributes. One of the attributes is the gi.
This is required.
It's pretty clear (replace attributes with "named data members" or
"fields" and it still read right).
> The model I'm describing is radically different than XML or SGML,
Sounds kind of like groves...
> The whole XML world is organized around the idea that the GI is the
> *type name*.
The name is not the same as the thing. I think the whole idea that gi
== type to be one of the biggest peices of misinformation around.
We had this discussion in SML-dev a long time ago....
|
