Re: Clarification on proposed requirement

> > > As an interested outsider, I prefer the wording you suggest, David.
> > > I think that requiring the name attributes of WSDL elements to be
> > > unique would be sufficient.  I think it would be dangerous to fix on
> > > a particular system for ensuring this, because, unfortunately, ID
> > > attributes are in a bit of practical limbo these days.  Just making
> > > this a normative clause in the WSDL spec should do the trick.
> > 
> > I doubt that IDs are dead.
> 
> I didn't say they are dead, just that their status is in a practical limbo.  
> The many tortured threads on how to fix this limbo on XML-DEV are ample fuel 
> for this opinion.
> 
> An ID technically requires a DTD or XSD declaration, neither of which are so 
> far required by WSDL.

For completeness, I'll mention here what has been discussed ad nauseum on 
XML-DEV.

The most effective way out of this limbo is a specification for an 
instance-level ID attrbibute type declaration, such as the

<?xml-id-attr "foo bar"?>

or

xml:id-attr="foo bar"

proposals that have been made by Tim Bray, John Cowan, James Clark, and others.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                   Principal Consultant     Fourthought, Inc.
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com   http://Fourthought.com   +1 720 320 2046
XML strategy, XML tools (http://4Suite.org), knowledge management
Track chair, XML/Web Services One (San Jose, Boston): 
http://www.xmlconference.com/
RDF Query using Versa - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-thi
nk10/index.html
WSDL and the Wild, Wild West - http://adtmag.com/article.asp?id=6004
XML, The Model Driven Architecture, and RDF @ XML Europe - 
http://www.xmleurope.com/2002/kttrack.asp#themodel

Received on Monday, 15 April 2002 13:42:11 UTC