OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: questions re WD-xml-infoset-20001220

Title: RE: questions re WD-xml-infoset-20001220

> -----Original Message-----
> From: james anderson [mailto:james.anderson@attglobal.net]
> Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 7:29 PM
> To: www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: questions re WD-xml-infoset-20001220
> 1. why don't attributes have a parent?

I presume the InfoSet did this to be consistent with the DOM.  It is a rather subtle
semantic (or perhaps pedantic) point, I guess, but the children
of a DOM Element are any sub-elements. Attributes are not children
of an Element ... so the element should not be the parent of the attributes.
[How could I have a parent, if I am not a child of that parent? Ponder that ...]
The DOM uses the ownerElement property to identify the element that
contains a specific attribute. 

The discussion for all this will be in the W3C member-confidential archives of the DOM
Interest Group ... If you are affiliated with the W3C, see the thread starting at

In the public mailing lists, I find a discussion (explaining the decision) starting at

Also, we had a discussion of this on xml-dev a year or so ago:

Interestingly, the XPath/XSLT data model does not make this semantic/pedantic
distinction, so is one of the little inconsistencies in the W3C worldview that the
InfoSet people have the unenviable job of trying to sort out.