Re: Last call comments on XML Binding Language (XBL) 2.0

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Norman Walsh wrote:
> |> 
> |> Section 1.4.7 speaks of the per-element partition of attribute names. 
> |> This is, I think, a holdover from the first edition of Namespaces in 
> |> XML. We suggest that it be updated to the terminology in the latest 
> |> Namespaces REC.
> |
> | I couldn't work out exactly what the new terminology was from the 
> | Namespces in XML spec, but I've tried to fix the spec. Please let me know 
> | if it is acceptable.
> 
> Could you please remind me where the updated draft is located?

Apologies, I should have included the link in the original reply. You can 
find the editor's draft here:

   http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/xbl2/Overview.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#extension


> |> > 2.16. The id Attribute of XBL Elements
> |> 
> |> There is, of course, a historical preceding for naming attributes of 
> |> type ID "id". However, we recommend that the attribute of type ID in XBL 
> |> 2.0 be spelled "xml:id".
> |
> | I don't understand. Could you elaborate on why you recommend making the 
> | attribute name longer?
> 
> Because it will allow XML processes to recognize that the attributes are 
> of type ID without relying on external information such as DTDs and 
> schemas. See http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-id/#intro

Why would this single feature be worthy of discoverability when the entire 
rest of the XBL processing model requires the UA to have built-in 
knowledge? I understand that xml:id would be very appropropriate and an 
important feature of proprietary languages, but I don't understand why it 
would have any benefits in the context of a language that is only useful 
in conjunction with UA-native support and that is intended to be used as 
a well-known standard language on the Web.

I have marked your request as a potential formal objection.

Cheers,
-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Wednesday, 21 February 2007 19:56:23 UTC