Hi,
> That is a good point. I like the way DISL handles this, but we have
> two considerations: 1) UIML sets a precedent with the <property>
> element that establishes "name" as the way to reference an existing id
> without conflicting; and 2) the additional reference attribute still
> leaves us with the issue of having conflicting id's. The DISL
> approach is very good for readability, but I think the problem Mr.
> Endo had was related to limitations of the DOM specification that only
> allows you to look up single elements by id.
OK, now I got it :-)
I could update the relevant parts WRT variables (Section 6.9 and the DTD).
Do I have the most current version? (uiml-core-4.0-draft_RS021007.doc)
All the best,
Robbie.
--
_/ Dr. Robbie Schaefer _/ Phone: +49 5251 60-6107 _/
_/ Visual Interactive Systems _/ Fax: +49 5251 60-6065 _/
_/ C-LAB Fuerstenallee 11 _/ _/
_/ D-33102 Paderborn _/ URL: http://www.c-lab.de _/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Helms" <>
To: "Robbie Schaefer" <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: [uiml] Summary of issues raised by Takashi Endo and suggested
UIML 4.0 changes
> Robbie, thanks for you input! Additional comments below.
>
> On 12/3/07, Robbie Schaefer <> wrote:
>> > Suggested change: add an attribute to <variable> called "id-ref" that
>> > is used to reference a variable after it is declared.
>>
>> We had thought of this when designing DISL and the current sulution in
>> the
>> UIML-DTD is that we have an additional attribute for the variable which
>> specifies wether it is used as a declaration or as a reference: reference
>> (true|false) "true".
>>
>> However if all agree that id-ref is the more proper/consitent solution
>> (since it is used in other UIML-elements in the same fashion) I could go
>> through the relevant parts in the spec and change the examples and
>> explanations.
>>
>> The point in favor of the "reference"-Attribute is that it is implicitly
>> set
>> true, so that only once, for the declaration, a variable needs to state
>> the
>> reference attribute, which IMHO adds to the readability of the
>> UIML-document.
>>
>> Anyway, I am open to both options.
>
> That is a good point. I like the way DISL handles this, but we have
> two considerations: 1) UIML sets a precedent with the <property>
> element that establishes "name" as the way to reference an existing id
> without conflicting; and 2) the additional reference attribute still
> leaves us with the issue of having conflicting id's. The DISL
> approach is very good for readability, but I think the problem Mr.
> Endo had was related to limitations of the DOM specification that only
> allows you to look up single elements by id. One way to solve this
> and use the DISL scheme would be to use a different attribute as the
> name of the variable and have an id attribute that's sole purpose is
> to uniquely identify the element within the document.
>
> Whatever we decide, I believe we should choose a consistent scheme to
> handle this for <property>, <variable>, and <param>. Thus using id in
> the declaration and name for the references may serve for this version
> of the specification with further improvements to come in the next
> version.
>
> Just my thoughts :)
> Jim
