- From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
- Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 05:46:24 -0400
- To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- CC: public-appformats@w3.org
Robin Berjon wrote: > On Aug 08, 2006, at 22:52, Matthew Raymond wrote: >> Please explain where the dual use of |xml:id| and |id| is >> undesirable. > > Because instead of specifying the attribute once and have it work > with all use cases you now have to specify it twice. I'm not following you reasoning here. They've already specified |id| in the working draft, and |xml:id| can be used simply by virtue of XBL being an XML based language. So the only think that might not be specified is how the two attributes interact, and the best solution there is to simply map one to the other. >> Out of curiosity, why can't namespaces simply inherit attributes >> from >> the "xml" namespace? That way I could use this... >> >> | <[ns:]element id="..." lang="..." base="..." /> >> >> ...instead of this: >> >> | <[ns:]element xml:id="..." xml:lang="..." xml:base="..." /> > > Assuming this didn't imply a host of other problems (which > unfortunately it does), it would still require going back in time to > 1998 and changing millions of implementations already matching > current specifications, which wouldn't be very convenient to say the > least. Questions unanswered: 1) What problems does this cause (other than those involving legacy implementations)? 2) Don't _ANY_ changes to XML require changes to the implementation? How is the fact that there older version of XML have any baring on new features added to later versions of XML?
Received on Wednesday, 9 August 2006 09:46:31 UTC