Re: Using HyTime Arcform stuff (was Re: Ephemeral XML?)
At 09:46 AM 1/14/97 -0900, Eliot Kimber wrote:
>Can we stipulate that it is assumed that nobody in this discussion will
>knowingly suggest that any syntax be required if it can be reasonably
>inferred? I believe that's a basic design principle behind XML.
Yes. Said another way, the set of archforms defined in the XML spec make up
the API for an XML browser (what Len has suggested we consider defining). To
override the default behavior, you don't necessarily even have to declare
another architecture. In parsing a FORM element, for example, the parser can
determine if it complies with the architectural form for FORM-type elements.
If so, the browser processes it accord to the behavior defined for that
architectural form (which would conform to the behavior defined in HTML for
FORM elements). If not, it looks in the stylesheet. If the desired behavior
is too complex for a stylesheet definition, possibly the stylesheet itself
could point off to another architecture or alternate architectural form.
Something to consider when we get to that point in the discussion.
Ralph E. Ferris
Project Manager, Electronic Publications
Fujitsu Software Corporation