Re: xml:id

SVG Tiny 1.2 allows both I'd and xml:id, so content using it is  
conforming.



On Jan 3, 2008, at 11:35 AM, Timur Mehrvarz <timur.mehrvarz@web.de>  
wrote:

>
> I'm forwarding this message I received from Eric Seidel a few days  
> back. Their decision makes me a uncomfortable. People can use xml:id  
> in their XHTML+SVG content and be compliant with one browser,  
> currently. Or they can use id without xml: and be compliant with 3  
> browsers. But not with the SVG Tiny 1.2 spec. Or am I missing  
> something?
>
> Timur
>
> On 28.12.2007, at 07:45, Eric Seidel wrote:
>
>> After some discussion in #webkit, we've decided against  
>> implementing xml:id:
>>
>> http://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16505
>>
>> xml:id has proven pretty irrelevant on the web so far (I can't  
>> think of a single page which actually uses it).  It provides little- 
>> to-no benefit over "id" as specified by SVG and HTML and just adds  
>> more unnecessary complexity to WebKit.
>>
>> I would recommend that WICD consider removing xml:id from their  
>> list of requirements ...
>>>
>>
>> Certainly if there was a major shift in the web and real websites  
>> actually started to use xml:id, or there was a demonstrable benefit  
>> to its support in WebKit, we'd reconsider.
>>
>> -eric
>
>