RE: document node attributes

I want to back up a little here because we still cant seem to get over the concept that xml:* namespace is a *requirement*.

Question to Peter:

1) What percentage of XML documents to you believe are "on the internet"  and processed by tools which have "accessibility to the internet"
1A) what percentage of XML Documents even have a base uri ? 

2) In your opinion what percentage of expected usage should be a requirement in order to add something to the xml: namespace ?

3) In your opinion, does adding a attribute to the xml: namespace require that  processors recognize it as valid ?

4) In your opinion what makes hypermedia extensions "more central" to xml than any other extensions like XLink or Dublin Core or XSD  ...

4A) Eg. If something as basic to XML as schema, which is in its own namespace 
*(e.g. xsi:schemaLocation="http://NamespaceTest.com/Purchase Main.xsd" )
, could you argue that hypermedia is *more exaulted* or *more special* or *more central* to XML then other technologies ? such that it deserves special treatment more than any other technology by the entire world ?




-----Original Message-----
From: Rushforth, Peter [mailto:Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca] 
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 8:33 AM
To: liam@w3.org
Cc: public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org
Subject: RE: document node attributes

Liam,

> adverts, which I can't do in XML (no equivalent of <script 
> type="text/javascript" src="googleads.js" />)

A simple thing that we could do would be to specify a <?xml-script type="application/javascript" href="googleads.js"?>

like this http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-stylesheet/

although I suppose googleads.js would still have to know it was being embedded in an xml document.

It would still be useable for people who preferred to work with XML on the client.

Peter

Received on Saturday, 22 June 2013 17:02:54 UTC