- From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 13:50:41 -0400
- To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Cc: public-microxml@w3.org
David Carlisle scripsit: > I would probably be against xml:id in anycase but the argument against > it would be weakened if the datamodel were extended to support ID > typing. None of the XML data models support language identification directly, yet xml:lang is probably the most often used of all the xml:* attributes. > Allowing syntax that was added to xml _specifically_ to support ID > typing, but not to provide the same typing mechanism is just leading > to confusion. It was added to support element identification, not ID typing. ID typing is done through DTDs or XML Schemas. -- Principles. You can't say A is John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> made of B or vice versa. All mass http://www.ccil.org/~cowan is interaction. --Richard Feynman
Received on Thursday, 16 August 2012 17:51:02 UTC