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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] ID/IDREF is evil

On 4 Feb 2014, at 15:51, Cox, Bruce <Bruce.Cox@USPTO.GOV> wrote:

> Hey, Roger, I see you're still at it.  I've been busy with other things and haven't looked at xml-dev for quite some time, but I'm going to get back into it, if only for the entertainment value.  I'm retiring in 24 days, so I'm going to want some brain teasers.
> I've heard others advise to abandon ID/IDREF, but yours is the first rationalization I've heard, and you're the only one I've heard suggest Schematron as the replacement.  If you look at mpep.uspto.gov, or tmep.uspto.gov, you'll see what I've been up to the past three years.  These procedure manuals are fairly bursting with internal cross references, which we manage with ID/IDREF.  In practice, how much more efficient would Schematron be for this application?  Would we actually see performance gains?

As far as I'm concerned, performance isn't the issue. The issue is that you can't break your document into pieces without switching to a different validation technology.

I see this with the W3C specs I manage, The DTD for these makes heavy use of ID/IDREF. As the specs have grown we have split some of them into pieces for ease of management (e.g. change control, authoring), and this makes the documents that one actually authors invalid against their own DTD. 

Michael Kay

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS