[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
"J.Pietschmann" <j3322ptm@yahoo.de> wrote:
| Arjun Ray wrote:
| > "J.Pietschmann" <j3322ptm@yahoo.de> wrote:
| I was under the impression that the "no-DTD" discussion revolves around
| the redundancy of *any* such formalism in certain (not all) situations.
My impression: "no-DTD" is code for "anything but DTD". If there weren't
a prejudice involved, the discussion could have been about "no-schema" or
"schema-less profiles".
|> I suppose at some point the reason will have to be rediscovered why
|> system identifiers in notation declarations - in SGML, at least - often
|> point to executable code. (And, yes, XML has butchered this one.)
|
| I'm not sure how Linux-OS/390 executable code is going to help me on my
| Win2k machine.
I think you missed the "butchered" part. In SGML, system identifiers are
inherently local in scope. [See _The SGML Handbook_, p.378 ff (discussion
of 10.1.6)]
| I'm pretty sure the mechanisms provided by SGML did work well in the
| environment of editing and processing SGML documents in a controlled
| environment, but we are talking about sending data over networks to
| clients outside the enterprise and similar stuff.
Where clients, if they have any sense, should have their own catalogs, and
should ignore any system identifiers that happened to have come along for
the ride.
The formalism is still about naming.
|>| From an XSLT perspective, XInclude is much better than entities.
|>
|> Actually, there is no difference. CONREF attributes needed reinvention,
|> after all.
|
| Entities have to be resolved by the parser, there is no way to pass them
| downstream because there are no entities in the logical data model.
Well, that's a serious problem with the data model, isn't it? An XInclude
"element" doesn't have to be processed either. So whether a black box was
encased in pointy brackets or ampersand-semicolon is inessential (except,
of course, for prejudice.)
| XInclude elements can be created, and, provided it is accepted as an
| standard passed to an XSLT processor. I don't see what this has to do
| with CONREF attributes.
Reinvention of the same effective semantic, of course.
| Also, because the thingies were edited independently now, allocating IDs
| became a growing nightmare. Moreover, there were requirements to specify
| some thingies and produce a file with them and all thingies they depend
| on. Creating this by hand is painful.
As I said, wholesale importation of DB-think is a surefire way to get into
trouble:-)
| The whole problem disappeard after I switched to my own reference
| elements
Yep. The technique was discovered long ago: HyTime locators and location
ladders. [D*mn! The dreaded H-word. Here come the garlic and crosses.]
| and used XSLT, in particular document(), for doing the merge. After this,
| I soon realized that xsl:key is much more powerful and flexible than IDs.
Use the heavy artillery only when you need it.
|
