Re: C.12 types of declared values for attributes?

I never understood why I needed more than one unique identifier for an
element: that's why the SGMl syntax never bothered me. If Eve and Lee both
think it's useful, I'll defer to their judgement (though I'd love an

   If we are going to do that, I like Lee's prefix proposal: We could have
attributes named id.attrname and idref.attrname. Making ID attributes
self-identifying in this way, and turning them into an application
convention, removes another problem from ID as specified: the restricted
syntax. We can declare XML IDs as CDATA "with an interpretation" and make
users much happier.

   Martin's comment about rude words is a problem, but not one that I can
see how to solve, as we will need _some_ fixed string. ensuring
non-rudeness in any natural language would proabably also insure
meanininglessness all around, too.

   -- David

RE delenda est.

David Durand              dgd@cs.bu.edu  \  david@dynamicDiagrams.com
Boston University Computer Science        \  Sr. Analyst
http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/   \  Dynamic Diagrams
--------------------------------------------\  http://dynamicDiagrams.com/
MAPA: mapping for the WWW                    \__________________________