[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: ID-ness is not the same as type (Re: Re: determinin gID-ne
In relational dbs, one can autogenerate an ID, or choose a set member. So the assignment of keyness is not the same as being a type. Ok. But just to be clear, why is that a mistake for XML? len -----Original Message----- From: ht@c... [mailto:ht@c...] Bob's comments remind me of one of the good things about the XML Schema key/keyref mechanism -- it separates 'being a key' from 'being a string/integer/date'. SGML and then XML conflated these two, which was with hindsight a mistake. It would be nice if whatever solution we come up with didn't make that mistake again. I _think_ the xml:idatt(s) proposal at least could be understood to be _additional_ information about an attribute.
|
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
|