Lists Home |
Date Index |
Daniel Schierbeck wrote:
> I've read the W3C XML Fragment Interchange Candidate
> Recommendation, which I've never seen implemented (that may just be
> because I'm ignorant.) The specification seems verbose, and is
> therefore in my opinion unfit as a generic way of transferring XML
I think it has only been implemented twice (once by me, once by a
student I was helping).
FragInt is fine technically, but it doesn't really fit in with XML as it
is practised: if you want a selection of data you use a database query
that generates XML; if you want a fragment of a book then you typically
want a chapter sized chunk (file size); if you want to encapsulate some
fragment you use simple SOAP; people don't do distributed updates (or
they use backend tools for replication); there is no widespread way to
say which information in the context has inheritable scope, so there is
no automatic way to make fragments of that kind of documents; etc.
I would love FragInt to become a standard part of the basic XML stack.
Its absense is an XLink killer, for example. But probably it is one of
those things so fundamental that there is no demand, perhaps in a
similar fashion to how the tribesmen in my brother's old village never
wanted soft underpants instead of itchy arsegrass: never had it, never
- XML Fragments
- From: Daniel Schierbeck <firstname.lastname@example.org>