Subject: RE: [xsl] Re: XSLT Transformation .NET From: "Nathan Young -X \(natyoung - Artizen at Cisco\)" <natyoung@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 13:27:19 -0800 |
My understanding is that you're talking about using a generic XML format to represent a generic record format, kind of like this: <csvFile> value1<comma/>value2<comma/>value3<comma/>value4<newLine/> value5<comma/>value6<comma/>value7<comma/>value8<newLine/> value9<comma/>value10<comma/>value11<comma/>value12<newLine/> </csvFile> But seriously, the two objections I care about that recommend against the following XML design: <div class="monty"> <span class="python"/> </div> Are that it's harder to meaningfully validate using DTD or XSD, and that it's using the XHTML document format to hold something that's not really a web page at heart (though there may not be enough context here to illustrate this often complex and posssibly subjective point). The design ---->N > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 12:47 AM > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [xsl] Re: XSLT Transformation .NET > > > Didn't anyone ever mention in the > > microsoft camp there that xml elements named as field names is a bad > > idea? That it is a much more useful source if the xml elements are > > all named the same? > > Oddly, over on xml-dev people are busy complaining about > formats that do > > <div class="monty"> > <span class="python"/> > </div > > rather than > > <monty><python/></monty> > > Why do you think it's bad to use field names as element names? > > Michael Kay > http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSL Does not Transform Co, Kamal Bhatt | Thread | [xsl] Generating Unique ID, Arun Sinha |
Re: [xsl] use two consecutive trans, David Carlisle | Date | Re: [xsl] use two consecutive trans, drkm |
Month |