- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 17:13:54 +0000
- To: public-sml@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4992 sandygao@ca.ibm.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |hasProposal ------- Comment #5 from sandygao@ca.ibm.com 2007-11-08 17:13 ------- To restate the the proposal from the F2F in a slightly different fashion, and to answer Ginny's questions. The proposal was: 1. There are cases where processors MUST treat nodes as "the same". The only known case is when the targets are identified using URIs in contexts where the URI has all the information about locating/identifying the target, then 2 targets are the same if they are identified by the same (codepoint-by-codepoint comparison) URI. SML URI scheme is one such example. EPR is not because URIs used in EPR don't have all the information. It should be clear from new schemes definitions whether they fall into this category or not. 2. There are cases where processors MUST treat nodes as "different". This happens when there is something available in the element information items for the targets that tells them apart. If there is an infoset property for which the 2 targets have different values, they are different. This applies recursively for complex-valued properties. 3. For all other cases, it's impl-dependent whether they treat nodes as different or same. This (especially #2) may sound like a time-consuming task. But I imagine in most implementations, this can be tested very easily. e.g. in DOM, if you only construct one DOM document for each model instance document, then the "==" comparison suffices.
Received on Thursday, 8 November 2007 17:14:00 UTC