At 13:45 2003 01 07 -0800, David Orchard wrote: >Another potential aspect to look at is how XPointer would deal with these >various approaches. Perhaps show how XPointer is affected by each, >particularly for bare names. For example, Option #1, #8 has the >disadvantage that it means XPointer requires DTD or Schema validation. >Option #5, #6 has the disadvantage that the XPointer parser has to look at >the xml:idattr to figure out what the id attribute name is. I don't think XPointer looks at xml:idattr any more than it looks at, say, xml:base. It looks at the infoset. All we'd have to say in a new little xml:id-ish spec is that xml:idattr adds a few pieces of information to the infoset (that, to date, only comes from the DTD), and there need be no change to XPointer. paulReceived on Tuesday, 7 January 2003 16:57:02 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:55:45 GMT