W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2007

Re: Moving xmlFunctions-34 forward

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 16:59:19 +0100
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5bps4232js.fsf@hildegard.inf.ed.ac.uk>

Hash: SHA1

Dan Connolly writes:

> On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 16:13 +0100, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> [...]
>> So, would the following be more likely to attract consensus:
>>  Change the story in the draft to include a notion of 'constrained
>>  elaboration', during which a specified set of namespaces act as
>>  quotation signals.
> That's counter to my intuition, which is: any namespace might
> include quotation mechanisms, so unless you know otherwise,
> you have to assume every element quotes/controls its children.

First, are we clear about what is meant by quotation?  I didn't make
it clear in my original posting, I realise -- I meant, only, quotation
_with respect to elaboration_.  I'd be surprised if many languages
will want to do that, but, I guess, your intuition differs from mine,
and I'm certainly not claiming a uniquely priviliged insight here.

Second, even supposing the worst case, in some sense, all this means
is that almost every application will start from the elaborated
infoset treating its _own_ namespace as a quoting signal.

Examples would help. . .

- -- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

Received on Monday, 11 June 2007 15:59:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:16 UTC