[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] Re: determining ID-ness in XML
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: Tim Bray <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:08:41 -0600
But there is an architectural solution now. Some don't like it
and yes, this is an architecture thread, so perhaps "selling"
can wait for another thread. (See self-fulfilling prophecies).
What are the architectural objections to #1?
The more semantically-loaded strings we add to well-formedness,
the more XML processors become RTF processors and that feels
retro. Will the semantic escape always be xml:yadda?
From: Tim Bray [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
At 08:40 AM 29/10/01 -0600, Paul Grosso wrote:
>Here are some options (all discussed before):
>1. use the internal subset to declare IDs
#1 is minimal-impact. Can it be sold? I.e., if you
want the "name" attr to be an ID, then you need the following
at the top of the file with a line for each element type
that "name" can appear on:
<!DOCTYPE rootType [
<!ATTLIST element1 name ID #IMPLIED>
<!ATTLIST element2 name ID #IMPLIED>
I'm not sure it's going to be easy to get the community to
buy into this.