W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > September 2007

Re: p:label-elements builtin

From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 13:38:25 +0200
Message-ID: <546c6c1c0709060438n442772b3oe498c86ee3495d95@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org

On 9/6/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> / Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk> was heard to say:
> | Um.  Having one implementation where you can rely on that doesn't seem
> | very useful: people will write pipelines that work in your
> | implementation and then find they don't work in others.  It's like
> | relying on argument evaluation order, or how a++ + a++ comes out in a
> | given C compiler.  If there's a need for non-duplication between
> | documents it should either be required or there should be a switch to
> | guarantee it.
>
> So what do folks think? Sequential numbers, some guarantee of global
> uniqueness, or implementation defined?

I already proposed to split the problem in two parts (with two
different component):
* generation
* uniqueness checking

And for the generation I say : implementation defined,
the other solution is a 'mode' option that have at least decimal,
hexadecimal, base64 and random

Mohamed
-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 
Received on Thursday, 6 September 2007 11:38:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:54 GMT