[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: XPointer crisis
> '//*[@id=foo]' (or some other syntax with equivalent semantics) > can accomplish everything that 'id(foo)' can. More, actually: > it also works with documents that don't have (or have but don't > reference) a DTD, W3C XML Schema, or other infoset-augmenting > resource. As an added bonus, the recipient doesn't have to > retrieve (and process!) the DTD/XSD/what-have-you. As a negative, the ID values won't be in a hashtable after parsing, and //*[@id='foo'] will take a very long time to execute on large documents (especially given the descendent axis), unless you implement a streaming-xpath processor that can catch it on the fly from SAX. > Re: the 'xml:id' and 'xml:idattr' proposals: these sound reasonable, > but it seems to me like an awful lot of work to specify, implement, > and deploy just for the sake of barename fragment identifiers. Apart from that they are definitely *not* just for the sake of XPointer or barename fragment identifiers. The absence of an xml:id attribute is my daily nuisance when I can't get a DTD for some of my data. Btw xmi:idattr has the big disadvantage of getting lost when you pick a fragment out of a document and the root element is lost... Thanks, Christian Nentwich
|
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
|