On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 11:33:24AM -0500, Tod Harter wrote:
> Isn't the answer then to NOT have the PI in the original data? I mean if you 
> sometimes need it and sometimes don't then the stylesheet isn't really PART 
> of the document

this is rather a council of perfection, isnt it? in practice:

> document, so the processing chain should provide that information... In other 
> words your base document stored on disk should NOT contain the PI, instead 
> the request for the document should somehow specify what stylesheet to use. 

but when the "request for the document" == "loading it into Opera", then
its a damned-site easier to have that PI in there.

A PI is, after all, a *hint* to a processor, which the processor
may choose to ignore. All we want is to have AxKit configurable about
whether or not it implements that PI instruction

> PI's in documents should only be present when they are ALWAYS relevant. 
um, I beg to disagree. that was NOT the way PIs were defined
way back when. they are optional hints to whoever wants to read them.
 

-- 
Sebastian Rahtz      OUCS Information Manager
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to