Re: [xml-dev] MicroXML and &
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Michael Kay <[email protected]> wrote:
--
Uche Ogbuji http://uche.ogbuji.net
Weblog: http://copia.ogbuji.net
Poetry ed @TNB: http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/
Founding Partner, Zepheira http://zepheira.com
Linked-in: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji
Articles: http://uche.ogbuji.net/tech/publications/
Friendfeed: http://friendfeed.com/uche
Twitter: http://twitter.com/uogbuji
http://www.google.com/profiles/uche.ogbuji
Actually, it strikes me as quite an intelligent layering. If xinclude processing can be done in a different layer from XML parsing, why not entity expansion? In fact, it's strongly arguable that it SHOULD be a separate process; one of the use cases for entity expansion is to give a level of indirection so that the same entity reference can be replaced by different text at different places/times, and that works much better if it isn't embedded in the parser.
I couldn't even support such an idea in principle. For me, one of the cornerstones of XML's value is in completely determining the lexical space. I think leaving entity interpretation to applications would kick a huge hole in that.
Well you can find plenty of debate about XInclude and its separate layer, and it distinctions from general entities. Not something I really feel like going into. I am, however, surprised that you say that replacing the same entity reference with different text at different places in the document is a use-case. That's news to me, but it is a use-case that suits elements rather than entities.
Uche Ogbuji http://uche.ogbuji.net
Weblog: http://copia.ogbuji.net
Poetry ed @TNB: http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/
Founding Partner, Zepheira http://zepheira.com
Linked-in: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji
Articles: http://uche.ogbuji.net/tech/publications/
Friendfeed: http://friendfeed.com/uche
Twitter: http://twitter.com/uogbuji
http://www.google.com/profiles/uche.ogbuji