This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters  


Home > Archive > Microsoft XML > December 2003 > Fxml





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Fxml
f_Parlant

2003-12-18, 8:45 pm

Fxml is a new standard proposition, based on XML but enabling tag
overlapping between different namespaces:

Exemple:
<a:tag1>
<b:tag1>
</a:tag1>
</b:tag1>

Each namespace is a proper tree, but tags might overlap among different
namespaces.

<article:body>
<philosophy:notion1>
<finance:notion1> -----
</philosophy:notion1> |
<philosophy:notion2> |
</finance:notion1> -----
</philosophy:notion2>
</article:body>

Please can someone tell me the advantages and drawbacks of Fxml and if it is
still xml-ish or is it already Nxml (non-xml) ?

François Parlant
__________________________________
My homepage / Mon site personnel
http://cib.homedns.org:8080/JSPWiki/
(This site is home hosted and might be off sometimes)


Rowland Shaw

2003-12-18, 8:45 pm

"f_Parlant" <vendo.p@laposte.fr> wrote...
quote:

> Fxml is a new standard proposition, based on XML but enabling tag
> overlapping between different namespaces:
>
> Exemple:
> <a:tag1>
> <b:tag1>
> </a:tag1>
> </b:tag1>
>
> Each namespace is a proper tree, but tags might overlap among different
> namespaces.
>
> <article:body>
> <philosophy:notion1>
> <finance:notion1> -----
> </philosophy:notion1> |
> <philosophy:notion2> |
> </finance:notion1> -----
> </philosophy:notion2>
> </article:body>
>
> Please can someone tell me the advantages and drawbacks of Fxml and if it


is
quote:

> still xml-ish or is it already Nxml (non-xml) ?




Drawbacks:
* It is not XML.
* Seems like a hack.
Benefits:
* None Obvious.

Do you have any sources you could cite?


Chris Barber

2003-12-18, 8:45 pm

I can't see how that would ever work. You may as well have two separate root
nodes in their own namespaces (still invalid XML of course).
The whole point of XML is that the tags are all closed in sequence allowing
such things as hierarchical tree generation. Mixing the tags from different
namespaces has no real benefit in any conceptual framework since the
namespace is intended to 'separate sections of XML as opposed to allowing
them to mix.
Where did you see such a proposal? I searched on "fxml" and couldn't see
anything even remotely connected.

Chris.

"f_Parlant" <vendo.p@laposte.fr> wrote in message
news:brrvde$ebr$1@news-reader2.wanadoo.fr...
Fxml is a new standard proposition, based on XML but enabling tag
overlapping between different namespaces:

Exemple:
<a:tag1>
<b:tag1>
</a:tag1>
</b:tag1>

Each namespace is a proper tree, but tags might overlap among different
namespaces.

<article:body>
<philosophy:notion1>
<finance:notion1> -----
</philosophy:notion1> |
<philosophy:notion2> |
</finance:notion1> -----
</philosophy:notion2>
</article:body>

Please can someone tell me the advantages and drawbacks of Fxml and if it is
still xml-ish or is it already Nxml (non-xml) ?

François Parlant
__________________________________
My homepage / Mon site personnel
http://cib.homedns.org:8080/JSPWiki/
(This site is home hosted and might be off sometimes)



Sponsored Links


Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com  Software forum  Computer Hardware reviews