- From: Clark C. Evans <clark.evans@softwareag-usa.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 14:48:18 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org
- cc: cce@clarkevans.com
On Thu, May 18 2000 Jonathan Marsh wrote: | The original goal was for XInclude to be transparent. | Your comment fuels my suspicion that this may not be the | best direction. I also concur with Eric van der Vlist's post [1] -- having XInclude information available to XSLT would indeed be a very large improvement. Following is a straw-man suggestion for allowing tighter XSLT integration without requiring a modification to XPath. Suggestion: Only apply the "inclusion" process when the destination element is <empty/>, etc. This suggestion creates a fixed-point so that the inclusion process applied to the same text a second time will be a no-op. ... source.xml <foo> <bar xinclude:href="include.xml#xptr(b)" one="1" /> </foo> include.xml <a> <b two="2" one="3" > some <br/> content </b> </a> ==> Apply "inclusion" process to source.xml result.xml <foo> <bar xinclude:href="include.xml#xptr(b)" one="1" two="2" > some <br> content </bar> </foo> ==> Apply "inclusion" process to result.xml to make result2.xml result2.xml <foo> <bar xinclude:href="include.xml#xptr(b)" one="1" two="2" > some <br> content </bar> </foo> ... This slightly-different behavior makes allows the include specification to work othogonally with other specifications without change... ... The primary problem as I see it is, how does one deal with attributes? An obvious solution is to copy over attributes that do not already have values -- think inheritance. However, this may cause questions for XSLT as to which attributes were copied and which were already specified. This quirk can be overcome if the xlink process somehow preserves this information, perhaps by appending an additional attribute detailing which attributes were copied. <foo> <bar xinclude:href="include.xml#xptr(b)" one="1" two="2" xinclude:copied="two" > some <br> content </bar> </foo> Hope this helps, Clark Evans References: [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-xinclude-comments/2000May/0001.html P.S. IMHO, if XInclude is going to use attributes, then it should not be "replacing" the enclosing element. This just hits me as wrong for some reason, but it leads nicely into the above formulation instead... Keep up the wonderful progress.
Received on Tuesday, 18 July 2000 14:36:48 UTC