[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Dec 13, 2004, at 19:00, Rich Salz wrote:
>> however, my atavistic dislike of angle brackets took over and I ended
>> up removing all the structural information specific to a dictionary:
>
> That's probably the wrong way to use XML.
I know. This is way I try to avoid XML as much as I can :o)
http://www.eod.com/devil/archive/xml.html
>> I'm not sure if I follow this line of reasoning... after all, the
>> "raison d'être" of an element is to provide meta-data about the
>> content.
>
> Sure. Is it more important that the value of an integer, or that the
> value is, well, a value?
In the scenario I'm dealing with, the value type (eg integer vs string)
is more relevant.
>> should attributes be viewed as meta-data about the content or
>> the element itself?
>
> Welcome to an xml-dev permathread.
Oh, my... time to rush to the exit?!?
>> What's the benefit of using an element attribute to define the type
>> versus using a different element altogether?
>
> Generic tools and xpath expressions, etc., only have to know about one
> tag. "All entries with the value 10" -- do you care if it's a string
> or an int?
Most definitively.
Cheers,
PA.
|
