[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than ID

• To: "Gavin Thomas Nicol" <gtn@r...>, "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@d...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>
• Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:34:05 -0500
• References: <3BEF9991.9080102@d...> <E163Ncl-0001C4-00@s...> <011401c16bbb$6ed56620$0a2e249b@n...> <E163O9m-0002bw-00@s...>

Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote:


> On Monday 12 November 2001 03:48 pm, Jonathan Borden wrote:
> > Well the DTD is data also, and I was assuming the context of my earlier
> > post when I suggested that IDs can be provided in XML documents via
> > internal subsets.
>
> I think DTD's and documents, even with internal subsets, to be different
> things.
>
> > The point is that XML IDs are identifiers which are
> > defined in XML 1.0 and do not depend at all on application specific
> > semantics.
>
> They always depend on application semantics. The only thing XML 1.0 does
is
> says that they nust be unique in a valid document.

Perhaps I am missing your point. By 'they' are you refering to "ID"s or
something else. When I refer to an XML ID I am refering to a concept that is
defined in XML 1.0 (and before that SGML of course) and refered to in XPath
where the id('foo') function refers to an _element_ which has an ID
attribute ='foo', similarly the DOM function getElementById('foo')

Now surely how this element is used, and what it 'means' is dependent on
application level semantics, but the element has a _name_ according to how I
use XML. By this convention, which is consistent across not only my own
thinking but XPath and DOM L2, an XML ID is a way to name an element so that
it may be retrieved via an API.

What do you mean by 'they always depend on application semantics."?

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>

• References:
  • IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
  • Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
  • Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>
  • Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• Next by Date: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
• Previous by thread: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
• Next by thread: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread