Subject: RE: About the source library From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 10:31:54 -0400 |
Hi Norman (I got it right this time :-) ------------------------- | What features of HyTime are not possible in XML? Remember, XML is SGML. | | <reply> | Simple, full SGML architectural form processing ;-) Also, some Hytime Architectural forms are fixed attributes, there's nothing in XML that precludes fixed attributes. ------------------------- <reply> not only that. Architectural form allows you to tell the parser that the "baba" element _is_A_ docloc element. Thus the "baba" element would be considered by a "architectural form" aware processor like DSSSL as a "docloc" element. Same thing for all other Hytime element. The point here is that if a parser recognize architectural forms and can process the "inheritance" we can then say that this parser support architectural forms. Actually, no XML parsers support full architectural forms (except SP which is an SGML _and_ XML parser) and architectural form is not something envisioned yet by W3C (and there is a very very low probability that they will). It could (as anything could be for an optimist mind ;-) but it is not yet part of the W3C ecosystem. The second point is that several Hytime constructs are declared as omittag (you know these silly ( - 0 ) things. Omittags are not allowed in XML. Thus, W3C need to include architectural forms in its ecosystem. If this is not explicitly stated in one of their spec, don't count that architectural form will be part of XML (from a usage point of view). W3C rarely re-use specs created by institutions other than themselves ;-). So, the point is that architectural forms and anything that includes this is not part of W3C ecosystem (because mainly they didn't wrote any specification about this). This is not necessarily a technical issue. <reply> ------------------------ | constructs are based on the terrible (in the XML world) - 0 Omittag (yes I | said it, I'll rest in the eternal flames :-) You can't base things on tag ommission, it's just a typing shortcut. Perhaps HyTime is harder to understand if the tags are not omitted, but that's not XMLs fault ;-) <reply> I do not say that XML is guilty of anything ;-) Only that omittagis is not part of XML. You are right to say that some constructs are harder to understand or use with begin and end tag but the fact remains that you cannot use omittag with XML (this is _the_ major difference with SGML) </reply> ----------------------- | Keep in mind that W3C is creating a competing linking spec (XLL and | XPointer) and that XML and Hytime is probably less (a lot less in fact) | probable than XML and XLL/XPointer Personally, I wouldn't characterize XLink and XPointer as "competition" with HyTime, just an alternative. But I agree that HyTime is less likely to be implemented. But HyTime has never been widely implemented. <reply> When I say competition, its competition for our eye balls or mind share. Look at what's happening today with XSL compared to DSSSL. W3C put its marketing machine at work to get as much developers mind share as possible. Result, a not completed specs got more mind share in some months than DSSSL in several years. If we want it or not, these techniques are competing for our mind share. Some of us are fortunate enough to know several languages but the mainstream won't be as fortunate. So, it remains that XLink/XPointer and Hytime are competing for "market share" (i.e. the biggest number of implementations) and mind share (i.e. the biggest number of people knowing these specifications). Actually, Hytime starts with a handicap. A not completed spec is more popular than a mature spec (since several years). </reply> regards Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netfolder.com DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: About the source library, Norman Walsh | Thread | RE: About the source library, Didier PH Martin |
Re: About the source library, Norman Walsh | Date | Re: jade/jadetex with tables (was: , Peter Nilsson |
Month |