[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: 1.a: Use Elements? -- critical ambiguity in question!



David Durand said:

>    I vote that we add a new XML declaration (that looks like a PI) to
> declare AF roles for elements, including a setting that simply maps all AFs
> to their element names.

I like this approach too.
> <?HXL on?>
> Should be enough, or:
> <?XHL link=a,footnote>
> 
This might better be
  <?XML LINK ELEMENTS "a footnote">

I don't see any need for XHL as an abbreviation.

> Or that we use architectural forms, the Internal
> subset, and separate attribute declaration to solve the problem in an
> SGML-like way.
> 
> <!doctype whatever SYSTEM "http://foo.com/whatever.dtd"
> [
> <!attlist link -XHL-form #FIXED "link">
> ]>

This doesn't work if the element called LINK already has
other attributes declared in the DTD.  If SGL is changed to
allow multiple AttList declarations for a given element, it
would be well worth considering, though.

Lee