RE: document node attributes

Hey David,

> 
> 1) What percentage of XML documents to you believe are "on 
> the internet"  and processed by tools which have 
> "accessibility to the internet"

I have no idea.   I'm focused on the Web, in contrast to the Internet.
The Web has apparently very little XML on it, at least relatively speaking.
I suppose that percentage is shrinking all the time, too.

Which is a bit odd, when you think of the push for "linked data".
Certainly HTML isn't "meant" to be a data encoding.

> 1A) what percentage of XML Documents even have a base uri ? 

Everything on the Web has a URI, or an address from which it
is obtained. But I'm dodging the question, I know.  It's a facility
that is very useful.  I use it.  It can dramatically reduce file
size where URIs form a lot of the content. 

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

I doubt that is how the xml: namespace threshold is established.

But if it is useful, enhances interoperability etc.,
why wouldn't it get a place there?


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

That's a good question.  I think there are things that an xml
processor could do for a client layer, for example to provide
overridable default behaviour for @href and @src i.e. fetch the
link with the suggested media type preference.  


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

The Web needs a _simple_ reliable standard in order to scale.


> 
 , 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 ?

Yes, I think the Web is a special case.  As mentioned, the
number one goal of XML is success on the internet.  You could
say, (I do say), that if you fail on the Web, you fail on the Internet.

The World Wide Web Consortium is named after the Web.

> 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" )

I've had this discussion before with David C. on this list.   xsi:schemaLocation 
is itself a form of hypertext reference(s), albeit with added semantics.

I can't claim that XML Schema would have used xml:href and xml:src
had they been available anyway, but I believe there are other
less complicated applications that could and would be in a position
to use xml:href and xml:src etc.  Simplicity is the key to scale.

Cheers,
Peter

Received on Monday, 24 June 2013 11:56:34 UTC