Robert J Burns wrote: > I appreciate the question. The issue you raise here is precisely one of > the issues this proposal seeks to address. Authors want as much > consistency between serializations that we can achieve. Permitting the > xml:id attribute in both serializations helps with that. I don't think so as this is not backwards compatible with existing HTML/XHTML content. > Add to those issue the fact that many authors do not ensure that their > id attributes are unique document wide and that's another use case this > proposal seeks to address. It basically follows the design pattern > already paved by the XML distinction. The xml:id can be reserved for > authors wanting strict ID typing (with fatal errors for ID collisions in > both serializations) while also allowing authors (including legacy > content) to use the id attribute more leniently (with potentially many > id collisions). Finally the proposal advocates for clear interoperable > processing of documents that have duplicate IDENT and ID values. If such distinction is useful for some users, then validators can very easily support two validation modes for documents -- one which will enforce ID checks and second which will just ignore such errors. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jirka Kosek e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz http://xmlguru.cz ------------------------------------------------------------------ Professional XML consulting and training services DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing ------------------------------------------------------------------ OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member ------------------------------------------------------------------Received on Thursday, 29 May 2008 08:00:11 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:31 UTC