RE: unique IDs for fn:id() and interaction with XSLT temporary trees

The way you get IDs is by validation of the data either by schema or
DTD.

Best regards
Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-qt-comments-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mike Brown
> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 7:37 PM
> To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> Subject: unique IDs for fn:id() and interaction with XSLT temporary
trees
> 
> 
> These issues came up as a result of discussion of a proposed
clarification
> to
> the EXSLT node-set() function specification [1]:
> 
> 1. XSLT 2.0 says that fn:id() is supposed to work on a temporary tree
[2].
> I
> do not see how any unique IDs that this function needs are going to be
> found
> in the temporary tree. It's not possible for one to associate a DTD or
> other
> schema with a temporary tree in order to force ID-ness or other type
> information onto the attribute nodes in it, correct? So I would expect
> that
> fn:id() would never return any nodes, when the context item is a node
from
> the
> temporary tree, since there are no unique IDs in the temporary tree.
If
> I'm
> correct, here, I propose that you add a note about this to XSLT 2.0.
> 
> 2. I'm actually having trouble finding where in the XPath 2.0 specs
there
> is
> any discussion of the mechanism of assignment of unique IDs (as would
be
> used
> by fn:id()) to nodes. Appendix B of the function spec says "The
> recognition of
> a node as an id value is sensitive to the manner in which the
datamodel is
> constructed", but the data model spec says only that "[Node identity]
> should
> not be confused with the concept of a unique ID, which is a unique
name
> assigned to an element by the author to represent references using
> ID/IDREF
> correlation"; nothing else, AFAIK. Did I miss something?
> 
> [1]
http://lists.fourthought.com/pipermail/exslt/2003-December/000982.html
>
http://lists.fourthought.com/pipermail/exslt/2003-December/000983.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#temporary-trees
>

Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2003 09:59:34 UTC