[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 10:22 AM +0100 9/18/02, Jeni Tennison wrote:
>Err, OK. I thought that you'd want to say "here's an image, here's a
>description of the image, here's a map file of the image, here's the
>alternative text for the image" -- in other words that it's somehow
>important conceptually that the src, description, map and alt are
>describing the same *thing*.
Yes, but this is provided by the parent img element.The parent img
element can have a map file that is the map for this image. It can
have an alt element that is the alt text for this image, etc. This is
pretty normal XML. You do not have to use an attribute to associate
two pieces of information together. In fact, at one extreme you could
eliminate attributes completely. I'm not suggesting that, but lets
not go building massive architectures just so we can use attributes
when an element based solution is so much simpler.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
