Subject: Re: "Roots" of confusion introduced at W3C (shortish) From: Michael Fuller <msf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 19:14:24 +1100 |
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 02:45:19AM -0400, AndrewWatt2000@xxxxxxx wrote: > When writing about XML and its family of technologies today is it possible > to use a single, unambiguous term for each of the following two concepts - > > 1. what in the XPath Recommendation is represented as the "root node" > (also referred to as the "document root") and > > 2. what the XML 1.0 Recommendation calls the "document element"? [...] > May I propose that the following be the standard terms: > > For item 1. - "document root" > > For item 2. - "element root" I would suggest a slight variation on this: For item 1. - "document root" For item 2. - "root element" With respect to the XPath date model, these two are the "document root node" and the "root element node". > I believe we do need some clear, unambigous, non-clumsy way to > communicate these ideas across XML technologies. Certainly. Michael ____________________________________________ http://www.mds.rmit.edu.au/~msf/ Multimedia Databases Group, RMIT, Australia. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: "Roots" of confusion introduced, AndrewWatt2000 | Thread | RE: "Roots" of confusion introduced, DuCharme, Robert |
RE: template match using mode with , Joshua Allen | Date | Accessing Text Nodes, Lee Goddard |
Month |