Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
 John Cowan wrote: > > > But having an implicit declaration would create two classes of Validity. > > Existing (non xmlid-conformant parsers) would declare the document invalid > > whereas updated applications would declare it valid. > > > Validity has been redefined before. For example, it used to be valid > to have two different attributes of type NOTATION on a single element, > but this is now invalid in the name of SGML compatibility. (It was > always *meant* to be invalid, but formal invalidity entered by way of > an erratum.) True. Another example was making duplicate enumeration values within the same attribute invalid [1]. But all of these examples relate to practices that were unlikely to occur in real life ~ therefore the impact was negligible. So, adding a new xmlid attribute has downsides either way:- you either need to update your DTDs or you need to update your xml processors. This is true even for those people and applications that have no interest in being able to address ID-less elements. One advantage of the PI solution is that it has no impact on validity, and is therefore opaque to existing applications and DTDs. Regards ~Rob [1] Errata E2 described in http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-2e-errata 
|
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
|
|||||||||
