[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
"J.Pietschmann" <j3322ptm@yahoo.de> wrote:
| Arjun Ray wrote:
|>| 1. avoiding collisions
|>
|> A non-problem.
|
| Really?
Yes. The associative power of the attribute mechanism in SGML/XML is
enough to encode the necessary disambiguation information (without
violence to the atomicity of names qua strings.)
| You probably know the XSLFO spec includes an element named
| instream-foreign-object, which is intended as a sort of hook
| for FO processors to provide functionality which may otherwise
| be awkward to provide in XSLFO.
Yes. A "bridge" element, to use AF terminology.
| People have expectations about the environment and tools which
| handle their XML,
Indeed. The tools rarely fail to reflect the assumptions of their
developers.
| Would you please elaborate why any of the developers and the users
| of the tools mentioned above, possibly including the FO processor
| writer, should see name collisions as non-problem?
It's a problem for tools that can't handle it, obviously. It goes back to
the developers' assumptions being misconceived.
|
