On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 09:48:38AM -0400, Peter Amstutz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Reed Hedges wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 10:02:00AM -0400, Peter Amstutz wrote:
> >>As I said, it's not ideal, but the advantages in potential
> >>compatability/familiarity outweigh stylistic issues.
> >Perhaps. I think it might be possible to come up with less-verbose,
> >less-vos-idiomatic, more-obvious-to-casual-users XML with a little care.
> Well, I'm already engaged in coding up support the format that I proposed
> as "XOD" (XML Object Description). If you have any suggestions, now is
> the time to bring them up.
I'll have to look at the code you just comitted.
> Oh, this is a great idea! Although, how do you delimit where you want
> HTML/XML embedded in a property, and when you want it represented in the
> structure? Meaning, you can dump the entire HTML into a single property,
> or you can expand out the entire DOM and make a Vobject for every single
> DOM node, and any combination of objects/properties in between. How do
> you specify what parts get put in properties?
Only CDATA and attribute data gets put in properties. All XML elements become
"xml:" vobjects. (I think I made a recent change to HTTPserver extension to
make this work). Look at vip://interreality.org:4232/news-rss.rdf for an
vos-d mailing list