Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
At 03:53 PM 09/11/01 -0500, Daniel Veillard wrote: >On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 12:40:46PM -0800, Tim Bray wrote: >> So where's the problem? When you're trying to process an >> XLink/XPointer into something and the only thing you know >> about it is that it's XML. Er..... what's the scenario >> where this happens? -Tim > In 2 seconds XInclude comes to mind, I'm sorry - a day reading follow-ups and I haven't seen my point addressed. Can someone please come up with some plausible use-cases where I would want to do any id-style addressing into some XML without knowing what kind of XML it is? I can't see XInclude'ing something if I didn't know what vocabulary the something was. I can't see writing any nontrivial XSL without knowing a lot about what I was transforming. It seems to me that the *right* solution is that any interface to an XPointer/XPath implementation needs to have an argument whereby you pass in internal knowledge of what, in the target document, the ID attributes are. Because (a you'll typically have such knowledge, and (b) such an override/input could be damn useful in lots of application scenarios anyhow. Since I'm the one that first directed attention at this particular molehill, I'm kind of embarrassed at the mountainous dimensions of the ensuing dialogue. -Tim
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format