- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 20:02:57 +0100
- To: Pratul Dublish <Pratul.Dublish@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "'public-sml@w3.org'" <public-sml@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Pratul Dublish writes:
> Thanks for adding your comment to Bug 5543. The WG has spent
> considerable time discussing if we should support DTD-determined IDs
> for barename processing. The SML spec does not require SML
> validators to do DTD processing, and XML processors are not required
> to expose DTD IDs. Therefore, the WG decided that support for
> DTD-determined IDs for barename processing should be implementation
> defined.
This is not acceptable to me. The claim about not exposing IDs is
spurious -- I'm not aware of any modern XML parsers which don't expose
the ID-ness of attributes. I just checked, and MSXML has supported
access to nodes via ID since MSXML 3.0. And just in case there's
confusion, DTD-validity-checking is _not_ at issue here: minimal XML
conformance requires attribute type assignment.
Accordingly, I will update Bugzilla to record that I am not satisfied.
I have to say I find it very difficult to understand your continued
intransigence on this point: don't you understand that _everyone_ uses
barename pointers all the time, and that if you _don't_ support them
you will just look silly? Which implementor, wrt which parser, is
actually the problem here?
ht
- --
Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFIi3TnkjnJixAXWBoRAn9eAJ4pkBbSq6IGfp9H6yuV9m3KdunK2QCeNV4s
he2zDVp+mX3ZBTlTgzrl3Ic=
=mGrA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Saturday, 26 July 2008 19:03:47 UTC