- From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:45:01 -0400
- To: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
- Cc: public-microxml@w3.org
Uche Ogbuji scripsit:
> I think the idea is that others (not the μXML specmakers) can decide
> on whether or not xml:id is needed. I think you've won in your battle
> to not treat with xml:id nor any otehr xml:* attributes in the μXML
> spec.
However, we still must decide the status of colons in names: if they are
banned, xml:id won't be usable at a higher level at all (ditto xml:lang,
etc.) So from a standpoint of pure syntax, there are four positions:
1) ban colons everywhere
2) allow colons only in the form "xml:*" for attribute names
3) allow colons only in attribute names, as in my editor's draft
4) allow colons in both element and attribute names, as in XML 1.0
None of these refer to semantics. #3 and #4 seem to have no defenders;
I am defending #2, and various other people are defending #1. But I
don't want to allow "xml:foobar" just for the sake of allowing it;
I want to allow it *so that* xml:id and even xml:Father can be used by
people who want to use them.
--
A poetical purist named Cowan [that's me: cowan@ccil.org]
Once put the rest of us dowan. [on xml-dev]
"Your verse would be sweeter http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
If it only had metre
And rhymes that didn't force me to frowan." [overpacked line!] --Michael Kay
Received on Thursday, 16 August 2012 16:45:23 UTC