RE: [xml-dev] XPointer crisis

[Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com>]

There was also my proposal to just leverage XLink labels for simple fragment identifiers:

http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200111/msg00109.html

 

This would mean extending the use of labels beyond simply labeling resources and locators within an extended link, but this seems to me to be a very logical extension. I don't see why we need IDs for this versus a simple label explicitly for the purpose of linking. Are people looking for guarantees of uniqueness, here, for the fragment identifier?

 

 -----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@softwareag.com]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:29 PM
To: Mike Champion; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] XPointer crisis

Leigh Dodds sent me some very useful pointers that summarize earlier discussion on this topic. The following XML Deviant article includes proposals by James Clark, and Tim Bray:

http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2001/11/07/id.html

The following contains various proposals for xml:id attribute, etc. It is slightly outdated, but contains messages for/against each option:

http://weblogs.userland.com/eclectic/xml-identifiers.html

Hope this helps anyone else who, like me, missed the initial debate.

Jonathan

----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org , an initiative of OASIS The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: