[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
<quote>
why bother encoding the tag name. why not just do
<!DOCTYPE SOME_UDEF SYSTEM "data:,<!ELEMENT UDEF_9_5_8 (#PCDATA) >" [
<!ATTLIST UDEF_9_5_8 ProductPartIdentifier #FIXED "TRUE">
]>
<UDEF_9_5_8>123-456-789</UDEF_9_5_8>
or
<!DOCTYPE SOME_UDEF SYSTEM "data:,<!ELEMENT UDEF_9_5_8 (#PCDATA) >" [
<!ATTLIST UDEF_9_5_8 MIL-STD-2549 #FIXED "Part Product Identifier">
]>
<UDEF_9_5_8>123-456-789</UDEF_9_5_8>
or just
<UDEF_9_5_8>123-456-789</UDEF_9_5_8>
either you have got it right or you have not.
despite the truism, that the generic identifer is just a special attribute,
what is the advantage to making the universal depend on the ideosyncratic?
</quote>
While that is compelling, it's probably not acceptable given that you may have multiple consumers of your data who may or may not be machines. I believe one of the goals of things like UBL is to preserve some human readability in the document, so that "rip and read" shops aren't completely left out in the cold.
Patrick
|
