- From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 11:45:40 -0400
- To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Cc: "public-microxml@w3.org" <public-microxml@w3.org>
David Carlisle scripsit: > If xml:id is going to be allowed I'm not proposing that we allow xml:id specifically. I'm proposing that attribute names are allowed to begin with the four characters "xml:". > It is possible of course for the data model not to help here and > the attribute data just to be recorded as attributes. But then you > are paying the price of pre-defining fixed attribute names with no > benefit. It's not a fixed attribute name; it's a particular form of attribute name, plus a warning that using names of that form for your private purposes may get you in semantic trouble later. > If xml:id isn't going to infer any automatic ID property and basically > it works in the same way as id (or any other attribute) then many > language designers (and I'm sue most users) would prefer just to use > id= rather than xml:id=. I wouldn't, because I think having a universal affordance is a fine idea here. -- That you can cover for the plentiful John Cowan and often gaping errors, misconstruals, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan and disinformation in your posts cowan@ccil.org through sheer volume -- that is another misconception. --Mike to Peter
Received on Sunday, 19 August 2012 15:46:03 UTC