OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

I have relatively few problems with the notion of an entity (even a
parameterized entity) being in XML 2.0 - the problem that I have
currently is that the entity mechanism that currently exists is tied
to the DTD world exclusively.  XInclude is not as "elegant" from a
handcrafting standpoint, but from an XML processing standpoint it
makes much more sense, especially in the presence of XPointer.

I personally would prefer to see <x:include href="myUrl#foo"/> over
"&foo;", or at worst some kind of glossary referencing structure a la

<x:entity name="foo">Here's my boiler-plate text</x:entity>
<x:entity name="bar" href='myUrl#bar'/>

<x:ref name="foo"/><x:ref name="bar"/>

The single area where this does prove problematic is in character
references. Even there, if you permit entities, I still think that
their declaration should be something handled as angle-bracket XML:

<x:char-entity name="nbsp" charset="UTF-8" charcode="160"/>

This is a&nbsp;fixed space.

In this case, entities would be limited ONLY to character entities in XML 2.0.  

-- Kurt

On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 13:29:30 -0800, Robert Koberg <rob@koberg.com> wrote:
> Peter Hunsberger wrote:
> > On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 13:04:09 -0800, Robert Koberg <rob@koberg.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Amelia A Lewis wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 10:20:42PM +0200, Toni Uusitalo wrote:
> >
> >
> > <snip/>
> >
> >>>At present, there's no apparent activity targeted toward providing an
> >>>alternate entity-definition mechanism.
> >>
> >>Don't know if you followed the Ant(ish) thread but we use Ant and its
> >>filter capabilities to do what entities do. For example, on copying
> >>files(ets) like:
> >>
> >><p>blah blah @psuedoentity@ blah<p>
> >>
> >>is replaced with its property definition.
> >>
> >>Alternatively you could use XInclude.
> >>
> >>Entities blow and are unnecessary.
> >
> >
> > Sure, or just use XSLT and a bunch of other attached machinery.
> >
> > Somehow this strikes me like telling someone that they don't need a
> > trunk on their favorite sports car and if they really want to haul
> > groceries around they should go buy a 20 ton dump truck...
> I guess I see it different. To keep entities would be more like asking
> everyone to own a 20ton dump truck. I guess I don't understand your
> point... The thread is about xml moving forward. Enitites are an anchor.
> Are you saying entities should be left to draw to an indefinite length?
> >
> > (Not that I'm a fan of entities either.)
> >
> Then why are you arguing?
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>

Kurt Cagle


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS