- From: Vasil Rangelov <boen.robot@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:02:02 +0300
- To: <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>
>Hopefully Norm will add it to the agenda and we'll see what the rest of >the WG thinks. Thanks. >I think the argument for the status quo is probably that only elements >and attributes can/should hold data: that it would be bad practice to >have a markup language in which you'd *need* to match text nodes, >comments or PIs. For example, for matching text nodes to be useful, >you'd need a design like: > > <links>index.html<sep />archive.html</links> > >which isn't something we'd want to encourage. Well, here's an argument against that. Hope it helps. Sometimes, the input XML may not be under the direct control of the pipeline author and (s)he may have to process exactly the bad type of XML you're showing. True, the pipeline author can always create an XSLT transformation to process that into something more XProc friendly, but if expanding the URIs is all that (s)he wants, then the process might get inefficient as there has to be one transformation for original-to-XProc, p:make-absolute-uris, and another transformation for XProc-to-original. >On the other hand, I generally believe in giving people tools even if >they might use them incorrectly. Amen to that :) Regards, Vasil Rangelov
Received on Saturday, 11 August 2007 10:02:19 UTC