W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > October to December 2002

RE: XPointer architecture (Re: [xml-dev] XPointer and XML Schema)

From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
Date: 16 Oct 2002 09:16:55 +0200
To: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@taxonomystrategies.com>
Cc: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org, w3c-xml-linking-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1034752615.8449.70.camel@ibook>

Hi Ron,

On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 08:53, Ron Daniel wrote:
> 
> Hi Eric,
> 
> Currently, DTDs and XML Schemas are the only W3C-specified means
> of declaring that an attribute is of type ID. Citing them as the
> normative means of determing ID-ness seems to hit about a 90/10
> tradeoff for interoperation.

I strongly disagree with this for two reasons:

1) This is creating specs with potential dead locks that become
difficult to update (imagine the W3C creating next year a new mecanism
to define IDs, you would have to update XPointer to accomodate this new
spec).
2) In a world of open specifications, I find it not acceptable to lock a
specification to use only specifications from the owner organization.
Other specs from other specifications might define IDs and I don't see
the point of blocking them.

There are cases when references need to be normative for technical
reasons, but I don't this this is the case here and making these refs
normative seems only either an editorial or a political decision!

Eric
-- 
Did you know it? Python has now a Relax NG (partial) implementation.
                                          http://advogato.org/proj/xvif/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2002 03:17:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:44 GMT