Re: Media types

> Consider this example from the XSLT specification:
> <html xsl:version="1.0"
>       xmlns:xsl=""
>       xmlns="">
>   <head>
>     <title>Expense Report Summary</title>
>   </head>
>   <body>
>     <p>Total Amount: <xsl:value-of select="expense-report/total"/></p>
>   </body>
> </html>
> It's a perfect example. This document is logically XSLT, not HTML. 

In this example, I'd say it's both HTML and XSLT.  However, HTML has
the advantage in determining how that XSLT should be interpreted, since
it's the container.

For example, if HTML had an element called "do-not-process" that meant
that any content whtin should not be dispatched to alternate processors,
and that your XSLT was within this element, would you still say it was a

I agree with TimBL when he says;

"The significance of any nesting of one withing the other is to be defined by
the nesting (outermost) specification [...]"

(from )

Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.

Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2002 10:42:32 UTC