[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
> Rob Lugt wrote: > > > Much to Tim Bray's dismay, I think that a variation of James Clark's idea > > using PIs may be best:- Use an attribute name attribute, but make it a > > pseudo-attribute inside a processing instruction. > > > > e.g. <?xml-typeinfo idnames="abc:id, ID, id"?> > > I agree, so despite the fact that it feels as though I'm swimming in concrete, > I'm making one last pitch for the idea of using a PI. > > The relevance and accuracy of information about uniqueness of attribute values > is not static - it only relates to the instance at a particular point in time > and for a particular use, so shouldn't be hard-coded into the instance. The > reasons for using PIs are similar to those that motivated their use for > associating stylesheets. There are a number of characteristics of documents that > rightly belong at a level above the instance - the fact that it is an XML > document, the version it conforms to, DOCTYPE information, stylesheet > information. I see information about the uniqueness of values as belonging here > as well. > > Adding an attribute to the root element or any other element is messy and > implies a certain range of uses for the document - editing would certainly not > be well served. A user of an only halfway clever application might be > considering what elements they could conceivably direct a link to. They put a PI > in the top of the document with a list of the elements and attributes they feel > they might wish to point at, and are immediately informed of which attributes > have failed the uniqueness check. They remove the offending values from the PI, > then continue to work. They cut and paste a fragment out of another XML document > and include it - if the attribute values aren't unique, they're told about it. > They decide to either change the values, or question whether they really need to > link to those elements... > > This just all seems much more manageable than stripping attribute values in and > out of the instance depending on whether a DTD is available, or it's important > that the values be unique or whatever else. Does anyone really find the > xml-stylesheet processing instruction such a kludge? I'm way behind on this list (as always), but I've been working my way through this thread, scratching my head at why on *earth* anyone would be seriously considering this xml:id and xml:attrid business. Grotesque, if you ask me. This seems an open and shut case: processing instructions. Period. Why are they in the language if we can't use them as they are most suited? -- Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant uche.ogbuji@f... +1 303 583 9900 x 101 Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com 4735 East Walnut St, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA XML strategy, XML tools (http://4Suite.org), knowledge management
|
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
|