[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
thanks for the clarifications.. This illustrates what the PI in XML can do
etc..
I guess if there is some security/access control aspects in XML, then
probably a right perspective is: how to give access to different portions
of an XML document to different users.. I will keep it in mind, if I have
to review works in these areas.
best, murali.
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Michael Rys wrote:
> The point regarding PIs is that it is just markup and has no semantics.
> Only a processor that sees the PI and understands its target will act on
> it. It does not introduce "code" into XML any more or any less than an
> element with a specific markup.
>
> For example, for SQL Server 2000 we designed a so called SQLXML
> template: an XML file that contains markup with special names that
> execute a query against a database. We decided to use a special
> namespace and XML elements for giving this information, but
> theoretically, we could have used processing-instructions as well. XSLT
> processors for example interpret a special PI as an instruction to
> transform an XML document containing that PI using the indicated XSLT
> transform. Theoretically, XSLT could have chosen an XML element in a
> special namespace for doing so.
>
> There are some trade-offs to be made, but neither approach is more or
> less secure per se.
>
> Best regards
> Michael
|
