RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples

["Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>]

href, src, rel, type, method, hreflang are good because they're battle hardened, and everybody is using them already.  tref is good because it is related to href.

 

They're all good because they can be referred to well established RFCs or standards for definitions.

 

I don't know if you had a look at the schema I posted earlier, but some more comments are in there.

 

Peter

 

---

From: Richard Salz [mailto:rsalz@us.ibm.com]
Sent: June 25, 2012 11:37
To: Rushforth, Peter
Cc: Andrew Welch; David Lee; Uche Ogbuji; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basic principles of MicroXML"

> Wouldn't it be nice if xmlsh could rely on hypertext affordances too?

Why can't it?

Seems me the only difference is the namespace-URI of the element and attribute.  Is that really a big deal?

Well, of course, the difference is that you'd have to come up with a definition that everyone would use, because it's good, rather than just because it was mandated by fiat.

        /r$
--
STSM, WebSphere Appliance Architect
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/soma/