Re: more on xnotes

On Sunday, December 7, 2003, at 04:03  PM, Markus Hoenicka wrote:

> Bruce D'Arcus writes:
>> Second, I've moved the user attribute to the note element.  Maybe we
>> should allow it optionally on either note or xnote?
>
> I don't see why. Everything within xnote except note is
> optional. Allowing the attribute on both xnote and note would allow
> weird contradictions that I'd rather do without.

OK, explain the logic of xnoteset, xnote, and note then.

What I don't want is:

<extension>
	<xnoteset xmlns="http://www.abc.com">
		<xnote user="whatever">
			<note/>
		</xnote>
	</xnoteset>
</extension>

Seems entirely too verbose.

At the same time, this seems awkward too:

<extension>
	<xnote xmlns="http://www.abc.com" user="whatever">
		<note/>
	</xnote>
</extension>

Beyond that, I don't much care.

But a lot of it depends on exactly what these grouping elements really 
mean.  One interpretation is that an xnote is in fact topic based.  By 
that logic, it would make sense for different users to be able to add 
"notes" within that.

If that's not what an xnote represents, and the topic would be at the 
level of xnoteset, then "note" starts to look a bit redundant.

Bruce



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills.  Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials.  Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin.
Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click