James Clark wrote:
> What you are proposing is that the
> "pattern" attribute be used to specify not the component that is a pattern
> but rather the component that is a name.
This is reasonable argument. On the other hand, naming is culture
rather than science. For example, o-o people use getters and setters.
Such names are very inconsistent with o-o, but many people think that
there are no better alternatives.
I still think that <define pattern="ff"><element name="gg">....
is better than <define name="ff"><element name="gg">..... But I do
not think that I can persuade you.
Let's have a issue, spend some time during the phone conference, vote,
and keep going.
Cheers,
Makoto
