W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > June 1997

Re: KISS (was: Parameter entity references in WF docs)

From: Alex Milowski <lex@www.copsol.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:15:35 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199706051515.KAA09317@copsol.com>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
> > Some will use SGML, others will not.  Developers will wonder what we were
> > thinking not allowing them to include "modules" *in* XML.
> 
> Why can the doctype itself not be considered a module?  

Well, it can.  I'm all for it!!!!

I would love to have a better model for reusing, including, and
subclassing definitions.  Can we accomplish this in XML?  Should we?

I'd rather see a uniform solution come into play from the WG8 group that
addresses issues for XML.  Considering this, we can push ideas "up" from
XML but I'm not sure if we should explicitly attempt to solve this in
XML.

> > I feel strongly that we should leave them in.
> > 
> > Simplicity does not always equal functionality.
> 
> True but it goes a long way toward first pass 
> implementation simplicity and as stated, "training wheels" 
> DTDs.  I don't find PEs hard; just rugs for hiding 
> domain messiness.
> 
> However, I like Dan Connolly's suggestion about functionality  
> beyond "pastie thingies" and think that should be 
> considered before a final decision about PEs is made.  
> This may be a very golden opportunity.

Agreed.  I like Dan Connolly's idea.  I'm not sure if we (the XML working
group) should address such functionality in XML.  We should make use of
parameter entities easy restricting it if necessary to make things
easier on developers and users.

In addressing philosophies, parameter entities as they currently exist are
nothing more that referenceable storage objects.  Hence, they have no formal
meaning until they are resolved and parsed.  If we want to solve more
complex problems such as re-use, subclassing, subtyping, etc. we should work
on *different* ideas potentially submitting them to ISO/WG8 for incorporation
in the current revision or future revisions.

In other words, parameter entities are useful and other ideas are more
useful but I'm not convinced we have the time and have gathered the requirements
to be able to solve this problem on our current schedule for XML.  Let us keep
parameter entities and restrict whatever necessary to make implementation and
use reasonable.

==============================================================================
R. Alexander Milowski     http://www.copsol.com/   alex@copsol.com
Copernican Solutions Incorporated                  (612) 379 - 3608
Received on Thursday, 5 June 1997 11:17:23 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 10:04:39 EDT