W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > December 2008

xml:id and/or id? (Re: TT telecon - agenda for 5 Dec)

From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 11:23:03 -0500
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Cc: public-tt@w3.org
Message-Id: <1228494183.8153.126.camel@localhost>

Hello Silvia,

we discussed the topic of xml:id vs id again today.

Since all existing DFXP players are either using xml:id or planning to
do so, we concluded that the specification was fine as it was and it was
better indeed to support only one way mechanism.

Regards,

Philippe

ISSUE-14


On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 23:08 +1100, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> If I may, I'd like to contribute some information to the xml:id vs id
> discussion.
> 
> I am aware that most players by now support xml:id, and that this may
> be regarded as a reason to keep it in the spec.
> 
> However, I have had feedback from another person looking to use DFXP
> for subtitles in Web video. Here is what he wrote:
> 
> "xml:id support in Gecko was attempted but it was pulled due to
> performance issues. xml:id support has explicitly been decided against
> in WebKit. The problem with xml:id on the general level is that it
> breaks the assumption that an element can have only one ID attribute.
> xml:id has already turned out to be more complex than expected for the
> HTML5 Validator.nu. Currently, it seems that xml:id is falling out of
> favor when it comes to browser-targeted XML vocabularies. (I'd prefer
> DFXP to use an element called 'id' in no namespace instead of xml:id.
> However, if at this point existing implementations support xml:id, it
> may be better to stick to xml:id as the *only* way--since having two
> ways is the problem--as long as xml:id isn't leaked to the
> general-purpose Gecko DOM e.g. through a scripting API.)"
> 
> I would support removing xml:id - in fact, I would support removing
> the use of namespaces where possible. It will make implementation much
> more lightweight. But that's a different discussion altogether.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Silvia.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 8:45 PM, David Kirby <david.kirby@rd.bbc.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Here's the agenda for tomorrow's meeting.
> > David
> > =============
> >
> > TT agenda for Friday 5th Dec 2008
> > Time: 10am Eastern, 3pm UK, 7am Pacific.
> >
> > 1) Review action items
> > www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/actions/open
> >
> > 2) Issues arising
> >    www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/open
> >
> > [Plus:
> > a) Spec needs to say that user agent must define a default region (replaces
> > action item 15)
> > b) Spec needs to say that a dfxp file containing only timing and text will
> > be displayed by a UA.
> > c) tts:textDecoration should be "lineThrough" and "noLineThrough" (Geoff's
> > email)
> > d) allow both xml:id and id?
> > e) Support for multiple languages (i.e. xml:lang on div?) ]
> >
> > 3) Proposed survey of issues
> >
> > 4) Progress with testing
> >  - xml:space (clarify behaviour)
> >  - Any other issues arising from the testing?
> >
> > 5) dynamicFlow
> >
> > 6) SMPTE
> >
> > 7) AOB
> >
> >
Received on Friday, 5 December 2008 16:23:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 2 November 2009 22:41:39 GMT