Associating DSSSL style sheets with documents

[Len Bullard]

Eve L. Maler wrote:
> 
> 
> The difference is that, by convention, you're making PI markup available
> that's available to every document and to every *location* in a document if
> necessary, no matter what its DTD (and no matter whether it even has one).
> It just happens to look suspiciously like a start-tag, which may be helpful
> to any software that has to parse the PI string.

By convention? You mean, by application.   

An inclusion on root makes an empty element available 
to every location.  A PI is something every document has to have.    
That isn't an improvement.  If you use a DOCTYPE and know the DTD,
don't  
you get the same effect?  XML goes out it's way to load up an 
instance just to get around a DTD.  I question the utility of that.
We tell them they are being freed of fixed markup, then add a 
question mark and say, oh, that's OK, that's XML.

> I don't think links in general should be done this way, but I do believe in
> PIs being used for, uh, instructions to processors.  

Ummm... sure.  Sort of what links are.

> (In other words, I'm
> not 100% against PIs, as some people are.)  In particular, I'm starting to
> get very fond of PIs for anything that has to be specified per entity.

No doubt.

len

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)