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

Re: Update on namespaces

From: Paul Grosso <pbg@arbortext.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:59:02 -0400
Message-Id: <199706111759.NAA22957@kronos>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Please explain what all this has to do with the namespace issue
or change the subject line.  I would like to argue very strongly
for separating what appear to me to be three orthogonal issues:
namespace, data typing, and behavior. 

> From ricko@allette.com.au Wed Jun 11 13:53:46 1997
> Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:51:21 -0400 (EDT)
> Reply-To: <ricko@allette.com.au>
> From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@allette.com.au>
> To: <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Update on namespaces
> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 03:51:04 +1000
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Priority: 3
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Resent-From: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
> Sender: w3c-sgml-wg-request@w3.org
> 
> > From: Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>
> 
> > At 21:37 11/6/97 +1000, Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> 
> > Why not data attributes with an XML-USES attribute?
> 
> In addition, sure. 
> 
> I am proposing that perhaps:
> 
> * entities should be able to have notations (i.e. an XML-USES data attribute)
> * elements should be able to have notations (i.e. an XML-USES attribute, does lextyping)
> * notations should be able to have notations (cascading notations: requires 8879 enhancement:
>   my examples used keyword "USES")
> * PIs should be able to have notations, as their first token (i.e. formal processing instructions)
> * documents should be able to have notations (i.e. the SEEALSO parameter), e.g.
> 
> <!DOCTYPE x SYSTEM "x.dtd"
> 	SEEALSO 	PUBLIC "IDN//w3.org//NOTATION xml-lang//EN" 
> 			PUBLIC "IDN//w3.org//NOTATION xml-link//EN" 
> 			PUBLIC "IDN//w3.org//NOTATION xml-style//EN"
> 			PUBLIC "IDN//sgmlopen.org/NOTATION CALS table model//EN"  []>
> 
> 
> > What changes other than the new TC would be required?
> 
> New keyword USES on notations.  I think also remove any restrictions on what things can have
> notations. 
> 
> > > a SEEALSO 
> > >parameter on the DOCTYPE declaration, to declare notations that together
> > convert the
> > >element set declarations into a DTD (document type definition). E.g:
> > 
> > What does this mean?
> 
> The DOCTYPE declaration & prolog give you element sets. A full document type definition (DTD)
> includes more than this: documents have other constraints and conventions and embedded languages.  The SEEALSO parameter allows the
> extra constraints and conventions
> to be declared in the document, by identifying public or system identifiers. The public text
> pointed to by these identifiers could just be plain text descriptions of what is needed. 
> Any software functionality for that notation should be keyed by the identifier string, not
> by examining its actual text.
> 
> Thus, the DOCTYPE declaration can become more like a full  DTD.  In the TC, the SEEALSO
> (additional requirements) parameter is part of the SGML declaration. I think this is wrong, 
> and it would be more correct to put it in the DOCTYPE declaration, as in the example above.
> 
> 
> Rick Jelliffe
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 11 June 1997 13:59:27 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 10:04:40 EDT