This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the DocBook project.
Re: XML Schemas and docbook documents
- From: Norman Walsh <ndw at nwalsh dot com>
- To: Yann Dirson <ydirson at fr dot alcove dot com>
- Cc: docbook at lists dot oasis-open dot org
- Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:18:23 -0500
- Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: XML Schemas and docbook documents
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org><email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org><20011210100710.A18914@kasba.alcove-fr>
/ Yann Dirson <email@example.com> was heard to say:
| In other words, I was thinking of extending the syntax of attributes
| so that we could write:
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
the same as
(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
Be seeing you,
Norman Walsh <firstname.lastname@example.org> | 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