Re: C.12 types of declared values for attributes?
At 1:23 PM 10/17/96, Michael Sperberg-McQueen wrote:
>On 23 October 1996, the ERB will vote to decide the following
>question. A straw poll indicates the ERB is leaning to keeping
>NAME(S) and NMTOKEN(S) but losing NUMBER(S) and NUTOKEN(S).
>C.12 Should XML change the set of types available for attributes?
>E.g. by suppressing NAME(S), NUMBER(S), NMTOKEN(S), NUTOKEN(S) and
>adding constraints in the form of regular expressions, ISO dates,
>language-code, external-id, type IDREF, ... (7.9.4, 11.3.3)
We should either expand the space as originally suggested; I like regexp
myself, and it's a drop-in in any language I can imagine people using for
an XML parser (C, C++, Java).
Otherwise, we should just go for CDATA, IDREF, and enumerated attributes
and bag the rest (ID should always be legal, and always be an attribute
called "id", I think). We're not allowing the unquotedness that NAME gets
you, so we might as well make it as easy as possible for each application
to reinvent the wheel of attribute subtyping without any interference from
us. I find the built-in attribute types almost useless, myself.
RE delenda est.
Some namespace pollution is your friend!
David Durand firstname.lastname@example.org \ david@dynamicDiagrams.com
Boston University Computer Science \ Sr. Analyst
http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/ \ Dynamic Diagrams
MAPA: mapping for the WWW \__________________________