- From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 06:57:30 +0100
- To: MicroXML <public-microxml@w3.org>
On 3 August 2012 02:17, James Clark <jjc@jclark.com> wrote: > That would be incompatible with XML. Query 'incompatible' James? It would be processed differently, but that doesn't make it incompatible? I don't think there is (as yet) any requirement to process all tokens identically to XML? Taking PI's out of the data model would make the parse different, no more. regards > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:13 AM, David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com> wrote: >> >> A little off the wall and probably dumb ... but .... just to make sure >> Is there any reason that <? xxx ?> has to be recognized as anything other >> than text ? That is, does it need to be part of the data model ? >> Could it not just be valid text content ? >> PHP wouldn't care ... other processors could look for <? xxx ?> within >> text nodes instead of expecting a PI node. >> >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> David Lee >> Lead Engineer >> MarkLogic Corporation >> dlee@marklogic.com >> Phone: +1 650-287-2531 >> Cell: +1 812-630-7622 >> www.marklogic.com >> >> This e-mail and any accompanying attachments are confidential. The >> information is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is >> addressed. Any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this >> e-mail communication by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the >> intended recipient, please notify us immediately by returning this message >> to the sender and delete all copies. Thank you for your cooperation. >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Liam R E Quin [mailto:liam@w3.org] >> > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 6:05 PM >> > To: Jirka Kosek >> > Cc: John Cowan; James Clark; Andrew Welch; public-microxml >> > Subject: Re: Starting point >> > >> > On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 23:42 +0200, Jirka Kosek wrote: >> > > On 25.7.2012 3:01, Liam R E Quin wrote: >> > > >> > > > But, losing xml-stylesheet and <?php?> might be too big a price. >> > > >> > > I don't think that PHP is argument for preserving PIs. >> > >> > I'm more trying to make sure there's a complete perspective than arguing >> > a position - <?php...?> is widely used today, and that syntax was >> > introduced in fact for XML use. >> > >> > >> > > more complex scripts will step out from XML well-formdness anyway. >> > >> > Also often true. >> > >> > On the other hand, <?publisher page-break?> is also a strong use case. >> > But could be equally well done with a comment. >> > >> > Liam >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ >> > Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ >> > Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml >> > >> > -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. Docbook FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Friday, 3 August 2012 05:57:59 UTC