W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > January 2003

RE: Options for dealing with IDs

From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 09:36:36 -0500
Message-Id: <p04330105ba49d0ad8c1d@[192.168.254.4]>
To: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@topologi.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>

At 1:24 AM +1100 1/14/03, Rick Jelliffe wrote:
>(Repost from Wednesday. This never made the archive, not sure why.)
>
>I think Chris misses out another option:
>
>?) Refactor XML so that there are four kinds of XML processors:  headlessWF,
>     WF, typed, and valid.  Deprecate WF in favour of WF and typedWF in all W3C
>     specifications.
>
>    - Headless WF must have no DOCTYPE.

And what happens if it does? How does a document indicate that it is 
headless? Simply by not having a DOCTYPE? Or is this a parser option? 
What happens if a headless parser encounters a DOCTYPE? This feels 
very rough to me.
-- 

+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
|           Processing XML with Java (Addison-Wesley, 2002)          |
|              http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xmljava             |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0201771861/cafeaulaitA  |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|  Read Cafe au Lait for Java News:  http://www.cafeaulait.org/      |
|  Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/    |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Received on Tuesday, 14 January 2003 09:42:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:15 GMT