Re: Bug 5543

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?

- -- 
       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:
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)


Received on Saturday, 26 July 2008 19:03:47 UTC