Re: xml:id Last Call comment from i18n

I move that we accept this resolution.  Let's try to do that before the 
xml:id CR call this Friday.

Any objections?

-- 
François

Norman Walsh a écrit :
> / "Richard Ishida" <ishida@w3.org> was heard to say:
> | We note that the definition of the value of an xml:id attribute is
> | defined only in terms of a valid NCName as defined by XML 1.0. The
> | definition for NCName in XML 1.1 is different.
> |
> | We think this consitutes a major defect in the spec in its own
> | right, but it also has significant internationalization implications
> | for users of XML 1.1.
> |
> | Please specify that the valid value is different in the case of XML
> | 1.0 and XML 1.1.
> 
> It was always our intent that the correct version of NCName was
> to be used; we explicitly called out XMLNames 1.0 and XMLNames 1.1 to
> make this point.
> 
> However, your comment makes it clear that we were not explicit enough.
> We have changed the first bullet in Section 4 so that it now reads:
> 
>   * The normalized value of the attribute is an NCName according to
>     the Namespaces in XML Recommendation which has the same version as
>     the document in which this attribute occurs (NCName for XML 1.0, or
>     NCName for XML 1.1).
> 
> Where the parenthetical NCName's are correctly hyperlinked to to the
> appropriate Namespaces in XML Recommendation.
> 
> Please let me know if this satisfies your comment.
> 
> (Our CR decision call is at 9a EST on Friday 4 Feb so a prompt
> reply would be most appreciated.)
> 
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
> 
> P.S. This change will be reflected in the proposed CR draft at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2005/02/CR-xml-id-20050208/ sometime within
> the next few hours.
>

Received on Wednesday, 2 February 2005 17:55:28 UTC