Re: [xml-dev] Make implicit structures explicit

[Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@talsever.com>]

On Tue, 8 Apr 2014 20:09:21 +0000, Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> The XML could be designed like this:
> 
> <aircraft-approach-procedure>
>     <transition>Contact control tower</transition>
>     <transition>Enter glide slope</transition>
>     <transition>Correct for wind conditions</transition>
> </aircraft-approach-procedure>
> 
> That design relies (implicitly) on the order of the <transition> 
> elements for denoting the sequence of steps to be taken. 
> 
> An alternative design is to (explicitly) specify the order. Here is 
> one way to accomplish this:
> 
> <aircraft-approach-procedure>
>     <transition step="2">Enter glide slope</transition>
>     <transition step="3">Correct for wind conditions</transition>
>     <transition step="1">Contact control tower</transition>
> </aircraft-approach-procedure>
> 
> Note that in this design it is not necessary to list the <transition> 
> elements in a particular order since @step explicitly indicates the 
> order.
> 
> I vote for the latter as best practice. I invoke this principle as my 
> justification: 
> 
>  	Make implicit structures explicit.
> 
> What do you think?

6. Witness this little paragraph itself, which I will send as a 
listicle with order indicated.

3. Those elements are ordered. 

2. This makes explicit the structure indicated by a sequence of 
elements. 

4. In addition, XML has a long-standing goal of readability (however 
little you may think it succeeds). 

5. Ordered text is much easier to read than unordered. 

1. XML has already specified that element order is significant. 

Amy!
-- 
Amelia A. Lewis                    amyzing {at} talsever.com
You like the taste of danger, it shines like sugar on your lips,
and you like to stand in the line of fire
just to show you can shoot straight from your hip.
There must be a 1000 things you would die for; 
I can hardly think of two.
		-- Emily Saliers