Subject: RE: inconsistencies between XSL and XLL From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 10:18:32 -0500 |
Hi Chris, <you said> It may be useful to read the XLink design principles [3]. In general though, having just gone looking for references to back up what I already understand, I agree that, without already knowing the answer, it is difficult to find it ;-) <Reply> You are right, now that I get the point you mentionned in mind, I catch different things that I couln't at reading the specs without that context. Maybe, it would be useful to briefly state this context so that we know that PIs are not considered content and therefore not part of the name space. Otherwise, we would make the inference that PIs would be part of the xml name space not because of content/noncontent reasons but ownership reasons a part-of relationship instead of a is-a-content-of relationship). So just to expose explicitely the underlying model. This would prevent some confusion. Thanx for your helpful comments Chris. Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netfolder.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: inconsistencies between XSL and, Chris Lilley | Thread | Re: inconsistencies between XSL and, Paul Grosso |
RE: About the style processing inst, Didier PH Martin | Date | Problem with XML specs, Didier PH Martin |
Month |