Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than ID
John Cowan wrote: > Jonathan Borden wrote: > > > > The only reason that I see the need for something really lightweight like > > "xml:id" is that internal subsets are not well handled by common software > > (e.g. SAX), > > > Actually, SAX is able to report the types of attributes. There is > nothing in XML 1.0 requiring XML processors to make this information > available, however. By "not well handled" I mean statements like this from the javadoc for DeclHandler: "This is an optional extension handler for SAX2 to provide information about DTD declarations in an XML document. XML readers are not required to support this handler, and this handler is not included in the core SAX2 distribution." Again, there does _exist_ a current mechanism to solve the "ID" problem, its just that it isn't always used. Perhaps the solution would be to make this interface mandatory for future SAX processors. Of course another solution to the ID problem would be to simply replace the non-XML DTD syntax with an XML syntax ... yeah ... that would really help to simplify XML because then we could do everything in the same syntax ... has anyone thought of that yet? Jonathan
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