- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 08:35:12 -0400
- To: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org
I understand the point of the language retention in the new draft. I haven't implemented it yet, but I don't expect it to be too hard. I'm not sure how useful this will be in practice, but it doesn't feel like it will hurt too much. I do wonder, however, why you felt it necessary to add a new Infoset property here? Unlike the included sets property, this is not directly related to the functionality of XInclude. It is something that could have been added to the original Infoset spec, and wasn't. Sneaking it in here doesn't feel right. There are a few of other issues with this: 1. As far as I know no API or tool provides specific support for this. i.e. there's no getLanguage call in DOM, or XOM, or XSLT. Everyone just reads the xml:lang attributes if they need to know this. 2. Adding language as an infoset property in addition to the xml:lang attribute opens up the possibility that these could get out of sync. That's a big enough problem in the Infoset already without adding to it here. I suggest simply removing all the verbiage about the [language] property and simply defining this in terms of an xml:lang attribute information item. I don't think this would have any practical affect on implementations, but it would make the spec smaller, simpler, and cleaner. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
Received on Wednesday, 14 April 2004 10:18:55 UTC