Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Paul Prescod <email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 06:45:59 -0400
Chris Maden wrote:
> I believe XSC:id to be redundant; by default, an attribute is assumed
> to belong to the element on which it is found. Attributes should only
> need qualification when they're somehow foreign to the element type,
> as global attributes (like xml:lang) are.
XSC:id is for element constraint declarations, no? Are you reading a
different spec than the one I am reading?
Anyhow: when I first started using SGML, it really bothered me that
attribute constraint declarations were not buried in element type
declarations. But now I think that it is better to strictly separate them.
It should be possible to attach attributes to any list of elements
(including ALL). I think that SGML and XML had it right, and we should go
back to that way of doing it.
If we want to allow nesting of attribute constraint declarations in
element constraint declarations, it should be a short-hand for the
Paul Prescod - http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco
Three things are most perilous: Connectors that corrode
Unproven algorithms, and self-modifying code
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)