> I couldn't even support such an idea in principle. For me, one of the
> cornerstones of XML's value is in completely determining the lexical
> space. I think leaving entity interpretation to applications would
> kick a huge hole in that.
>
Actually, it strikes me as quite an intelligent layering. If xinclude
processing can be done in a different layer from XML parsing, why not
entity expansion? In fact, it's strongly arguable that it SHOULD be a
separate process; one of the use cases for entity expansion is to give a
level of indirection so that the same entity reference can be replaced
by different text at different places/times, and that works much better
if it isn't embedded in the parser.
But that raises the question of why a "MicroXML" standard should need
entities at all. It can all be done with elements, and I thought the aim
was to reduce the number of concepts?
Michael Kay
Saxonica
