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

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

Yes.

@xml:src + @xml:type + @xml:hreflang

Nothing says you can't recombine or add other of the affordance "atoms" to build your own
media type semantics.

I thought about adding xml:tsrc, but I thought that was going too far.  What needs to
be done with a processed @xml:tref is to go and get the resource, so by that time
there is no need to have any other semantics because the inclusion or fetching 
semantics would be probably carrried by either the element name or other attributes
that could be added by the media designer.


Peter


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Sokolov [mailto:sokolov@ifactory.com] 
> Sent: June 25, 2012 11:37
> To: David Lee
> Cc: Rushforth, Peter; Andrew Welch; Uche Ogbuji; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore 
> the basic principles of MicroXML"
> 
> 
> 
> On 06/25/2012 09:44 AM, David Lee wrote:
> >
> > There is the camp that believes XML should be agnostic about the 
> > application layer And there is the camp that believes XML 
> should be tailored to make its use in a web browser more usable.
> >    
> Where do you think include semantics fall?  Seems to me they 
> could inhabit either or both (parser and application) layers. 
>  Peter: does your proposal address inclusion (like some 
> "micro" analogue to xs:include)?
> 
> -Mike Sokolov
>