[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 12:05, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> Try not to confuse entity processing with XIncludes. They are two
> different things. XInclude does not separate the logical and physical
> views of a document. XInclude does not define new logical or physical
> models for existing documents. All it does is define a process that
> goes from one document to another document.
And I find the approach of defining a process that goes from one
document to another document to be grossly inappropriate for the kinds
of tasks to which XInclude is likely to be used.
I don't buy your arguments about processing models at all. I don't
think they'll be of much use to developers trying to figure out what the
hell the contents of a document were intended to be by some far-off
writer when XInclude processing goes awry. (Assuming of course, that
they have an interest in such intent, which they may well not -
especially when XInclude adds additional complexity to the mix.)
I'm not confusing entity processing with XInclude - I'm suggesting that
entity processing may well have been a better approach to merging
document content than XInclude in the first place, and that XInclude
appears to be a bad idea on the face of it for a wide variety of both
architectural and practical reasons.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com
|
