This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: "Roots" of confusion introduced at W3C (shortish)
- To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: Re: "Roots" of confusion introduced at W3C (shortish)
- From: Michael Fuller <msf at mds dot rmit dot edu dot au>
- Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 19:14:24 +1100
- Cc: xsl-editors at w3 dot org, timbl at w3 dot org
- References: <a5.b685869.26fc59ff@aol.com>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 02:45:19AM -0400, AndrewWatt2000@aol.com wrote:
> When writing about XML and its family of technologies today is it possible
> to use a single, unambiguous term for each of the following two concepts -
>
> 1. what in the XPath Recommendation is represented as the "root node"
> (also referred to as the "document root") and
>
> 2. what the XML 1.0 Recommendation calls the "document element"?
[...]
> May I propose that the following be the standard terms:
>
> For item 1. - "document root"
>
> For item 2. - "element root"
I would suggest a slight variation on this:
For item 1. - "document root"
For item 2. - "root element"
With respect to the XPath date model, these two are
the "document root node" and the "root element node".
> I believe we do need some clear, unambigous, non-clumsy way to
> communicate these ideas across XML technologies.
Certainly.
Michael
____________________________________________
http://www.mds.rmit.edu.au/~msf/
Multimedia Databases Group, RMIT, Australia.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list