Lists Home |
Date Index |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
/ "Mike Plusch" <firstname.lastname@example.org> was heard to say:
| way. Every XML document can choose a different
| way to represent fields/properties/parts.
That'd be a feature.
| Having multiple ways leads to all
| the problems around attributes vs. elements.
What prob...no, let's not start that thread again. :-)
| Below are just six XML 1.0 acceptable ways to
| represent a key-value part. The reason
| there are so many is because there isn't
| a single good way to do it!
News flash: XML not invented as a serialization syntax for binary
objects. Details at 11.
| ConciseXML eliminates all the issues around
| attributes vs. elements.
This is not the first exploration of what XML would be like if it
allowed structured attributes. On balance, my feeling is that it would
create far more problems than it would solve, even though I admit some
problems would vanish.
Be seeing you,
Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM | It is so comic to hear oneself called old,
XML Standards Architect | even at ninety I suppose.--Alice James
Web Tech. and Standards |
Sun Microsystems, Inc. |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----