W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > July 2007

Re: Defaulting and syntactic shortcuts

From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:10:27 +0200
Message-ID: <546c6c1c0707200010t52c07af7y3b23e815f4e8ba36@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jeni Tennison" <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org

On 7/20/07, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> wrote:
>
>
> > 1. Why not allow AVTs in option/parameter values? This would,
> >    arguably, simplify the language. It would increase the value of the
> >    attribute syntax shortcut for option values and allow us to get rid
> >    of the distinction between @value and @select on p:parameter and
> >    p:option. (What is currently done with @select could be done with
> >    an AVT in @value.)
>
> I'm strongly in favour of having AVTs at some point.
>
> There is an argument for doing this now, because having AVTs would mean
> there was no need for a select attribute. If we intend to introduce AVTs
> at some point, that would leave us with a deprecated attribute. And
> deprecated elements/attributes are a pain.

Won't the deprecation of @select attribute become an asymetry with the
rest of element that use @select ?

Furthermore, I think that @select would become VERY interesting in the
future when we potentially would allow more that just strings....

So, I agree AVT are nice, but I'm not in favor of making @select
deprecated in any way



Mohamed

-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 
Received on Friday, 20 July 2007 07:10:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:53 GMT