On Wed, 2019-02-27 at 01:23 +0000, Wendell Piez
wapiez(_at_)wendellpiez(_dot_)com
wrote:
Hi,
[...]
So because it made it easier for EAD (or name-your-vertical SGML
application) to migrate to XML, entities came along with it. Tail
wagging dog? Thus evolution lurches forward. It is not at all clear
in
retrospect that this was not a correct choice strategically, even if
it has left us with technical debt of some nature.
If XML had (like HTML) been without an inclusion mechanism of its own,
solutions like XInclude woudlwould have happened sooner. The barely
adequate discourages the excellent.
A problem with entities is that they are in the syntactic domain rather
than representing relationships.
I think it was a help that XML could support named character
entities, e.g. & ldquo ; & mdash ; and the like. Since people were
already used to them from HTML.
That's true, althogh we didn't have an easy way to enable them, and we
never did get back to working on SDATA entities. Maybe that's just as
well.
Liam
--
Liam Quin, https://www.delightfulcomputing.com/
Available for XML/Document/Information Architecture/XSLT/
XSL/XQuery/Web/Text Processing/A11Y training, work & consulting.
Web slave for vintage clipart http://www.fromoldbooks.org/
--~----------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
EasyUnsubscribe: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/unsub/xsl-list/1167547
or by email: xsl-list-unsub(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
--~--