W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org > March 2002

Comments on XInclude

From: Roger L. Costello <costello@mitre.org>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 11:31:29 -0500
Message-ID: <3CA5E861.4ADFBAFE@mitre.org>
To: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org
CC: costello@mitre.org
1. The DTD shown in the document is inconsistent with the schema.

2. Why show the DTD when you already show a much more powerful and
expressive XML Schema?

3. The Schema shows the <include> element as being able to contain
elements/data other than <fallback>.  The spec does not define what
happens to those elements/data upon include, e.g.,

    <xi:include href="foo.xml">
       blah, blah <bar>blah</bar>
    </xi:include>

Is blah, blah <bar>blah</bar> replaced by the contents of foo.xml upon
include? Is it juxtaposed with the contents of foo.xml? etc 

4. You do not define a serialized syntax (i.e., what a text document
would look like after inclusion).  You only define an infoset model. 
Big mistake, IMHO.  Suppose that on a server I have an XML document
which contains <include> elements.  I wish to resolve those includes and
send the expanded (serialized) document to a client (as a text/string
document).  No way to do it, with this spec.  Example: in the
text/serialized version should the top-level included elements have a
fixed attribute, included="true"?  The infoset should have this
attribute (e.g., a DOM tree might be able to supply this information),
but should the serialized string have this attribute?  

5.  IMHO, you should just allow xPath expressions, and not allow full
xPointer expressions. (80/20 rule)

6. Are there any xInclude processors available yet?

My 2 cents.  /Roger
Received on Saturday, 30 March 2002 11:34:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:16:08 GMT