[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] IDs without DTD/Schema , Is there a way ?
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: Tim Bray <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:47:00 -0500
I agree this is an architectural problem and won't
go away. It is also one we have encountered here.
1. Reserved string: (hijack ID) feels klugy. There
was a long debate in the original XML design phase about
trying to avoid magic strings. I don't like the idea
of hijecking a string that is very likely to show
up elsewhere often.
2. Reserved namespace: I like this better. It seems
to be more in line with what namespaces can do. It
does feel a bit like a PSVI or privileged properties
approach. However, this also appears to be a case
where that is warranted. I am not suggesting a
Schema is needed, but that the association of reserved
properties vis a vis a semantic is there.
From: Tim Bray [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] IDs without DTD/Schema , Is there a way ?
At 01:34 AM 25/10/01 -0700, Ronald Bourret wrote:
>There are only two ways to determine if an attribute is an ID attribute:
>1) From a DTD or XML Schema
>2) The attribute name is hard-coded in your application
>You cannot just look at an attribute and decide if it is an ID
Yes, and this is one of our really big outstanding serious
architectural problems. It's really important for the
workings of the web that an address such as
have well-defined semantics. If foo turns out to be XML,
this is hopelessly underdefined. At various times James Clark
and I have both suggested that we just brutally hijack the
attribute name "id" and assert that it is of DTD type ID.
Other ideas have included using xml:id or having a reserved
namespace http://w3.org/xmlid or some such; any attribute
associated with it is of type ID.
This one isn't going to go away. -Tim