> > But XML is a hierarchical, not a serial, format...
> >
> > Despite the fact that some times (most times?) we will be using an event
> > based API, i.e. SAX, rather than a tree based API, i.e. DOM, it doesn't
> > mean we should break the XML paradigm!
>
> I don't see your point. I even don't know if my limitation is due to my
> poor english or to my restricted knowledge of XML. What prohibit to have
> in a structural hierachy, at the same level or not, two optionnal
> values, beeing present or not, the first one beeing eventually used in
> evaluation/configuration, the second for checking? I really don't see
> the paradigm breaking nor the paradox.
Well its been pointed out that we've already broken the paradigm anyway, so maybe it doesn't matter that much...
But essentially in a hierarchical structure there isn't any point in having two tags which have the same content at the same level, because at least in theory the parser hits them at the same time.
Of course all this breaks down for event based parsers like SAX, but its generally thought to be a bad thing to embed information into XML by making assumptions about what position a tag is in.
In theory at least an XML purist (which I'm not, usually, although I can do a good imitation of one) would be moderately horrified by this...
If we're going to use XML we may as well make it so that our format can be read in the raw by "generic" XML tools. Forcing everyone to use a toolkit to read VOTable isn't a great idea, not that toolkits aren't useful, its just the entire point of using XMl in teh first place is that its a standard...?
Al.
-- Dr. A. Allan, School of Physics, University of ExeterReceived on 2003-10-23Z18:09:57