[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: XML Schemas and docbook documents
/ Yann Dirson <ydirson@fr.alcove.com> was heard to say: | In other words, I was thinking of extending the syntax of attributes | so that we could write: | | <article | <class>whitepaper</> I've seen this suggested elsewhere recently. Specifically, that we could introduce a new syntax using some prefix character for "attribute elements". That you'd make <article class="whitepaper"> the same as <article> <_class>whitepaper</_class> (If you selected "_" as the prefix character.) While this would solve the problem from a purely pragmatic point of view, I'm not sure I like what it does to the XML data model and the complexity of applications. | > <xh:p xmlns:xh="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">...</xh:p> | > | > If you did that, and gave xmlns: attributes special treatment so that | > they didn't have to be declared (because they aren't really | > attributes), you'd be in pretty good shape. | | But maybe there is a fundamental problem here, in that something that | isn't really an attribute should not use attribute syntax... Yeah, I would have preferred processing instructions to magic attributes, but that's not the way the Namespaces Recommendation turned out. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | When told of a man who had http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | acquired great wealth, a sage Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | replied, 'Has he also acquired the | days in which to spend | it?'--Solomon Ibn Gabirol
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC