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 ]

Norman Walsh wrote:

> / Bob Foster <bob@objfac.com> was heard to say:
> | One radical idea would be to define
> | parseable entities in XML, in a
> | separate entity namespace, using a
> | simple first-definition-wins rule and
> | XInclude for the external ones. I
> | wonder why nobody's proposed that? Oh,
> | wait, a number of people have proposed
> | that. They just get slapped around
> | here until they go away. ;-}
> That may be the right answer, if we have to go that far, but it's not
> without complications that would need to be addressed. For one thing,
> how would these extra elements interact with validity assessment? For
> another, would you allow the declarations to be scoped? If yes, then
> that must be first declaration in scope. If not, how do you deal with
> transclusion? Are the entity references manifest in the parsed document?
> Do they survive parsing and re-seralization? Etc.

All good questions. Especially the etc. ;-}

First of all, this could be implemented today with no change to XML by a 
preprocessor that simply removed all elements from the "entity 
namespace" and expanded all references. It would be necessary that 
references _not_ use the & character or any other that might interfere 
with normal parsing. It is not necessary to allow definitions within 
expansion text. If the preprocessor went to text which was then 
reparsed, no issues except performance. This also deals with the 
validation question. And would collect valuable experience.

If it were, e.g., the head of a SAX stream, it would need to recursively 
parse the result of expansion.

I believe the technical term for things like scoping and transclusion is 
"piling on". There is a penalty for that. ;-} Today's entities don't 
support either.

Round-tripping is, as today, bothersome. XML doesn't require that 
validating parsers report entity references, in fact it appears to 
require they don't. Some do anyway. But expanded internal GE references 
in attribute values are not reported by DOM or SAX. Etc. Could one write 
parser implementations that preserved references as well as they are 
preserved today for entities? Sure, but they would also need to preserve 
definitions, which to validate would mean that schemas would need to 
explicitly allow the definitions or be applied through, e.g., NVDL.



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

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