On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 00:00, Keith Packard wrote: > I've decided to give XML a try and see how it looks; other applications > have started migrating to this for configuration and it has a lot of > appeal.
Nice idea. > <!ELEMENT number EMPTY> > <!ATTLIST number > value CDATA #REQUIRED> I'd write <number>123</number> and <string>Foo bar</string>. > <!ELEMENT plus (%expr;)*> > <!ELEMENT not (%expr;)> > <!ELEMENT if ((%expr;), (%expr;), (%expr;)?)> I simply love Lisp in XML. Lisp people really hate it. > <alias family="Times"> > <prefer><family family="Times New Roman"/></prefer> > <default><family family="serif"/></default> > </alias> I'd write <family>Times New Roman</family>. There has been a long debate on Attributes vs. Elements. I think that, while you are free to do as you feel, text should be implemented as text nodes (that is, as content of elements) unless there's a good reason to make it an attribute value; and the only reasons I do are: IDs, URIs and enumerations. But it's just a point of view. g. _______________________________________________ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
