Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
 Yes that is the case. SOAP refusing to acknowledge it is a W3C problem. They don't have the authority or perhaps the will to make their own specifications interoperable and well, so much for their standards. The PI solution is the least impact solution so far. Where one comes down on this seems to depend on how one thinks the system or processor vocabulary should be extended and what an XML processor must enforce. Again, means have always been there and by the circular logic that seems to pervade the W3C thinking, people are free to ignore those means. So we add PIs. They can ignore those too. So we add more system vocabulary attributes; they can ignore those too. Will we need Congress to legislate this stuff too? The bizarreness of this to me Chris, is that these are well known issues of hypermedia regardless of the notation. len -----Original Message----- From: Christopher R. Maden [mailto:crism@m...] At 06:41 1-11-2001, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: >What would result from the reverse solution: a document which >is subject to a raw XPointer must have a DTD or Schema? As Daniel noted, that's already the case. The problem, however, is that even if I have a DTD, there is no guarantee that the receiving system is going to pay any attention to it, and so I don't know if my XPointers are going to work or not. That's scary. XML processors are required to acknowledge ID declarations in the internal subset[*], but that has been declared infeasible because SOAP (for whatever reason) forbids internal subsets. It's also a maintenance pain since the ID-ness of an attribute is really a feature of the document type, and properly belongs with the rest of the document type definition, but some over-zealous validation systems will issue warnings about the duplicate declarations. (For a while, MSXML would halt because an element type can only have one attribute of type ID - never mind that the two attributes had the same name, as well.) I like the PI solution. It's redundant with the DTD information, doesn't change the structure or naming of my documents at all, but can pass information on to systems that don't read the DTD without my having to muck about with an internal subset. 
|
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
|
|||||||||
