W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms-editor@w3.org > September 2002

Re: [Moderator Action] id attributes, namespaces and possible coding errors

From: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 18:15:37 +0200
Message-ID: <15c901c25365$23e09bc0$228a608a@inria.fr>
To: <AndrewWatt2001@aol.com>, <www-forms@w3.org>, <www-forms-editor@w3.org>

Moderator: sent to www-forms@w3.org and www-forms-editor@w3.org
----- Original Message -----
From: <AndrewWatt2001@aol.com>
To: <www-forms@w3.org>; <www-forms-editor@w3.org>; <xforms@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 4:41 PM
Subject: [Moderator Action] id attributes, namespaces and possible coding

> It seems to me, if I understand the current WD correctly, that more than
> example contains coding errors relating to id attributes.
> If I am reading the WD correctly then id attributes are subsumed into
> "Common" attributes described in 3.2.1 and which are provided by host
> languages, according to 3.2.1.
> If the host languages provide these id attributes (the WD doesn't quite
> that, but refers to attributes of type xsd:ID) then are those id
> in the namespace of the host language?
> It seems, to me at least, reasonable that they are.
> However, coding examples such as the example in Chapter 2.1 show id
> attributes with no namespace prefix. ... Quite reasonably a reader would
> assume that the id attributes belong (natively?) to the XForms element on
> which they are situated.
> Should the example in 2.1 (and other similar examples) more correctly show
> html:id attributes or svg:id attributes - since 3.2.1 states that the type
> xsd:ID attributes come from the host language?
> Am I totally misunderstanding this?
> What is the point of this seeming complexity? Why not much more simply
> some/all XForms elements to have an id attribute?
> Andrew Watt
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 12:15:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:25:04 UTC