> > 2. The primary structure is represented by start and end
> tags; the others by
> > milestones - which seems like a purely technical imposition
> (i.e. bad
> > design)
> I don't see any way around this one, unless we start extending XML
> syntax, which I would be very hesitant to do.
Perhaps a underlying true XML model could have an alternative,
human-friendly syntax? This would no more be extending the XML syntax than
RNG Compact Syntax extends XML.
> I suppose we could avoid privileging one structure by using
> empty tags
> for everything, but I don't think that would be an improvement.
Patrick Durusau was demonstrating something at XMLEurope that translated
from free-for-all overlapping markup to a flat 'virtual milestones' model. I
agree though, working directly with all-milestones content (as human beings)
would be nasty.
- Alex.
-- DSDL members discussion list To unsubscribe, please send a message with the command "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org (mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)Received on Wed Jun 4 15:26:58 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Dec 03 2004 - 14:00:27 UTC