RE: xml:id Last Call comment from i18n

+1


============
Richard Ishida
W3C

contact info:
http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/ 

W3C Internationalization:
http://www.w3.org/International/ 

Publication blog:
http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-i18n-core-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of François Yergeau
> Sent: 02 February 2005 17:55
> To: public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Subject: Re: xml:id Last Call comment from i18n
> 
> 
> I move that we accept this resolution.  Let's try to do that 
> before the xml:id CR call this Friday.
> 
> Any objections?
> 
> --
> François
> 
> Norman Walsh a écrit :
> > / "Richard Ishida" <ishida@w3.org> was heard to say:
> > | We note that the definition of the value of an xml:id 
> attribute is 
> > | defined only in terms of a valid NCName as defined by XML 
> 1.0. The 
> > | definition for NCName in XML 1.1 is different.
> > |
> > | We think this consitutes a major defect in the spec in its own 
> > | right, but it also has significant internationalization 
> implications 
> > | for users of XML 1.1.
> > |
> > | Please specify that the valid value is different in the 
> case of XML 
> > | 1.0 and XML 1.1.
> > 
> > It was always our intent that the correct version of NCName 
> was to be 
> > used; we explicitly called out XMLNames 1.0 and XMLNames 
> 1.1 to make 
> > this point.
> > 
> > However, your comment makes it clear that we were not 
> explicit enough.
> > We have changed the first bullet in Section 4 so that it now reads:
> > 
> >   * The normalized value of the attribute is an NCName according to
> >     the Namespaces in XML Recommendation which has the same 
> version as
> >     the document in which this attribute occurs (NCName for 
> XML 1.0, or
> >     NCName for XML 1.1).
> > 
> > Where the parenthetical NCName's are correctly hyperlinked 
> to to the 
> > appropriate Namespaces in XML Recommendation.
> > 
> > Please let me know if this satisfies your comment.
> > 
> > (Our CR decision call is at 9a EST on Friday 4 Feb so a 
> prompt reply 
> > would be most appreciated.)
> > 
> >                                         Be seeing you,
> >                                           norm
> > 
> > P.S. This change will be reflected in the proposed CR draft at 
> > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2005/02/CR-xml-id-20050208/ sometime 
> > within the next few hours.
> > 
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 3 February 2005 11:58:42 UTC