- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 22:40:38 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5772
Rob Burns <rob@robburns.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Platform|PC |All
--- Comment #2 from Rob Burns <rob@robburns.com> 2008-06-19 22:40:37 ---
No, I don't think changing the meaning of the ID data type would be wise (since
its used in so many other recommendations and would only create confusion for
those working with various recommendations). Using xml:id for ID values in both
serializations would provide authors with a familiar pattern (xml for strict
fatal error handling with @id for another more permissive data type and perhaps
some error recovery). Therefore this would mean introducing a new data type for
the @id attribute, although it is a data type that would be generalized, yet
compatible with, the ID data type. Likewise it would be compatible with
existing content usage of the id attribute.
Finally, at the very least, this bug suggests the need for interoperable error
handling for document conformance errors with the id attribute (and xml:id
perhaps too).
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 19 June 2008 22:41:18 UTC