|
Liam,
I am mildly poetic and possibly dyslexic so I have much respect for Arjun's comment here: > >... there's no denying the attraction of short monosyllabic substitutes for long-winded terminology. Hence, sadly, the ubiquitous misuse of 'tag'. I can see that Arjun is sharp, so am I. Do you realize that Arjuns rant is about a comment in my code? Seriously. //WTF? Arjun popped off with keystrokes that were not designed to help. Software not designed to help is evil. Fortunately Arjun only popped of with words, not software. There is a fine line between words and software. Keystrokes are keystrokes. Maybe Arjun just does not realize yet, just how serious a piece of technology this is. I still have hope for him. I see that He's bright (IAM too) Here is a challenge for the both of you: Help me make the comments function better at commenting and explaining. If you think it would be more clear to the majority to rephrase the stuff in green in my code show me where. I will even change stuff that's not in green with a little convincing. > That and the crazily-named DOM function 'get elements by tagname", as if > there were tags with names other than start, end, and, possibly, empty. In XMLFoundation, you can obtain the address of a member mapped to an element or an attribute, the "Tag" in this setting is the C++ string of bytes used to assemble the (Attribute or Element) which ever it be. What would you call it? Lets not fight about this petty stuff. How about contributing an enhancement or helpful comment? Brian > From: liam@w3.org > To: arjun.ray@verizon.net > CC: xml-dev@lists.xml.org > Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 19:25:38 -0400 > Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Terminology (was: RFC for XML Object Parsing) > > On Sun, 2014-03-23 at 14:12 -0400, Arjun Ray wrote: > > > On a more serious note, _is_ XML terminilogy "standardized" in any > > way? > > The XML Recommendation and the XML Information Set (infoset) are the > closest we come. > > My first reaction would be to stay well away from a spec that claimed to > understand XML and then confused tag, element and attribute. Sometimes > I'd be the one to lose out, though, I expect. > > > > > For 'tag', I would argue that it means (the entirety of) the markup at > > either the start or the end of an element. > > Ys. tags are physical, elements are logical. > > > While any other intended > > meaning is probably a lack of RTFM, there's no denying the attraction > > of short monosyllabic substitutes for long-winded terminology. Hence, > > sadly, the ubiquitous misuse of 'tag'. > > That and the crazily-named DOM function 'get elements by tagname", as if > there were tags with names other than start, end, and, possibly, empty. > > Liam > > > -- > Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ > Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ > Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > > XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS > to support XML implementation and development. To minimize > spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting. > > [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/ > Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org > subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org > List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php |