W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > May 2011

xml:id [was: XProc Minutes 21 April 2011]

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 10:39:57 -0400
Message-ID: <9B2DE9094C827E44988F5ADAA6A2C5DA02AFCDC7@HQ-MAIL9.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-processing-model-wg-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-xml-
> processing-model-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Norman Walsh
> Sent: Sunday, 2011 May 01 14:15
> To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
> Subject: XProc Minutes 21 April 2011


>    Paul wonders if we could do better about attributes named "xml:id"
>    and "id"

I looked into this, and xml:id really doesn't help us.

In fact, section 8 Extensibility says:

 This specification is not extensible. There are no provisions for
 application designers to alter the name of the xml:id attribute,
 the set of attribute values that are considered IDs, the location(s)
 where they can occur, or make any other extensions.

So the xml:id spec is really about xml:id only.  What it says about
xml:id attributes would be nice to be able to say about attributes
named id, but as it stands, the xml:id spec doesn't give us that
leeway.

paul
Received on Monday, 2 May 2011 14:41:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 2 May 2011 14:41:20 GMT