[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Re: [office-metadata] Re: [office] Suggested ODF1.2 items
Hi Patrick, Patrick Durusau wrote: > ... >> Have you any bad feelings with the second attribute based approach? >> > If I am reading it correctly it looks like you have a milestone in the > first one and an open/close element in the second, although they are > concatenated. Yes? How do you define a milestone, is a start/end tag a milestone? I guess here is a misunderstanding. I don't like approach of start & end flags. I will expand the example of the solution I prefer to the following: <p><span/><span meta:class="foo"/><span meta:class="foo">blahblah</span></p> <p><span meta:class="foo">something</span><span meta:class="foo"><span/></p> All elements with @meta:class="foo" are of the same semantic and define an area, which is not related to the XML hierarchy. In this special case - representing an alternative to a start & end tag - this area is a sequence of content, but it might be as well clustered all over the content.xml. > > Steve DeRose actually did a presentation at Extreme Markup on a > variation we developed for a Bible encoding project where there are > two milestone elements that are linked by startID and endID (only one > allowed in each) to deal with overlapping markup. Your xsl:key > suggestion would work here. > > I have misgivings about the use of a milestone plus a more normal > start/end tag. Mixing markup techniques as it were seems prone to > problems. > > Would you allow two milestones in addition to milestone plus a regular > element? > > That would give implementers two ways to accomplish the same end, not > often a good idea. > Hopefully the questions above settled by clarifying the intended approach. Cheers, Svante.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]