W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > January to March 2006

[Bug 3050] Linking mechanism

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 06:12:19 +0000
CC:
To: public-i18n-its@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1FO7RD-0000iT-4q@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3050





------- Comment #7 from fsasaki@w3.org  2006-03-28 06:12 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> >> The PI has the advantage of working everywhere 
> >> (always valid even in DTD-based formats).
> >
> > What do you mean by "valid"? Processable? That 
> > would be the case with XLink too.
> 
> You're right. What I meant to say was different:
> Using a PI would allow DTD-based formats to use the ITS-link function even when
> the users cannot modify the DTD. The DTD does not to know anything at all of
> ITS, while with the link element (or attribute) it needs to know at least about
> that.
> 
> -ys
> 

Ah, o.k., I see. The disadvantage is just the other way round: you cannot
validate a PI. Hence, if somebody types
<its:rulesLink xlink:hrefs="someUri"/>
it is an error since "hrefs" should be "href". However, if you type
<?its-rules hrefs="file.xml" ?>
nobody will find the error.

I am wondering what is more important here: The easy of validation, or being on
disturbance to validation ...
Received on Tuesday, 28 March 2006 06:12:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:06 UTC