Syntax, shall we?
mark.uzumati at virgin.net
Sun Feb 3 04:37:52 PST 2002
On 2002.01.26 12:36 Neven Has wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 04:22:28AM -0800, Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee wrote:
> > > As someone already mentioned, it could cause some problems in
> > > future, if we start using some third party XML software. For
> > > XML editor won't include another profile when it encounters
> > > it will just leave it be. It could be said that this element
> > > the XML" in a way. (Don't take this literally. :)
> > When i first read this was implemented in nALFS I almost screamed
> > out "NEVEN?!? WTF ARE YOU DOING?!?" :) I can't, in good heart,
> > the idea of <include>.
> Heh, well... as I said, it seemed like a good idea at the beginning.
> > > But, on the other hand, we won't be able to expend it to suit
> > > needs if we start using XInclude instead. There is so much
> stuff that
> > > could be added to our own <include> that would allow
> implementations to
> > > do a lot of nice things. For example, by specifying remote url
> > Actually XInclude has full support for URI/downloading external
> Yes, but how well is this implemented in libxml for example? I haven't
> played that much with it, so I can't say how well it would handle
> downloading errors or how easy would it be to write that handling
> around it?
> > Allthough i think we should hold this off, external entities should
> > for now, imho.
Hehe, i think overexcitement caused by all the sudden activity got the
better of everyone :) <include> is out then, yes ?
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message
More information about the alfs-discuss