Xapi-J: proposed interface to Document

[David Megginson]

Richard Light writes:

 > This is exactly the sort of problem which adopting the 'grove plan'
 > approach is meant to deal with.  In line with your suggestion, the SGML
 > property set starts with the class sgmldoc, or 'SGML document', which is
 > 'the parsed SGML document. The root of the grove.'  
 >
 > In my view, XAPI should be taking advantage of this existing framework
 > (and naming conventions) where it is relevant to XML's requirements.
 > Didn't someone do a summary of the relevant classes and properties a
 > couple of months back?

I agree with Richard.  Like SGML, groves can be very complicated or
simple, as required, and XML can easily use a simple model -- just
enforce a single list of supported modules, as XML enforces a single
SGML feature list and declaration.  

Why redo all of the work for XML that's already been done in the
HyTime annex and DSSSL standard?  I can see no advantage in
re-inventing the wheel for XML: it will simply force software and
documentation to support two different, incompatible approaches.

I do agree that we need more and better documentation on groves, but
we will need to document a proprietary XML approach as well.

For more on the grove support currently available in SP (for full SGML
and XML), see

  http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/dmeggins/grove.html


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 ak117 at freenet.carleton.ca
Microstar Software Ltd.         dmeggins at microstar.com
      http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/dmeggins/

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (rzepa at ic.ac.uk)