Compound Documents - necessary for success?
mrc at allette.com.au
Sun Jan 31 04:15:38 GMT 1999
Roger L. Costello wrote:
> This presupposes that (a) we know apriori what documents we want to nest
> within <doc>, and (b) what order the nested documents are to be in, etc.
> It assumes everything is static. I was thinking along the lines of a much...
With all due respect Roger, I think that the problem is that we're both asking
questions and with few exceptions, nobody's answering. In my own case, I assume
that this is due to the fact that:
a) creating compound documents with fragments using the same DTD as the parent
may cause problems, but that there would always be a better way to handle such
b) nobody's sure whether this will be a problem once XLink, XPointer, XML
Fragments and X?? have spun their magic,
c) I've not clearly explained what I think the problem is,
d) I'm missing the point so totally that nobody feels that it even merits a
I've raised this twice in the last month and nobody's addressed it in a way that
alleviates my wondering. Would someone be so kind as to at least indicate which
of the above points might be the most accurate? (I have been called an idiot in a
public forum before - I won't be offended as I recall that the sting goes away
after a couple of beers...)
Marcus Carr email: mrc at allette.com.au
Allette Systems (Australia) www: http://www.allette.com.au
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev