- From: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <EB2M-MRT@asahi-net.or.jp>
- Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 09:33:49 +0000
- To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
- Cc: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, dan@dankohn.com, MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
Dear colleagues, Thank you very much for contacting us. I read the xml:id working draft. Here are some questions. Q1. When an XML document has an xml:id error, how should fragment identifiers (esp. bare names) be interpreted? Q2. When we process non-validated documents that do not have xml:id errors, are xml:id attributes "DTD-determined IDs" or "schema-determined IDs" as specified in the XPointer framework? Q3. Suppose that a document is wholly validated against the associated DTD and this document does not have xml:id errors. Then, are xml:id attributes "DTD-determined IDs" or "schema-determined IDs" ? Q4. Suppose that a document is wholly validated against the associated W3C XML Schema schema and this document does not have xml:id errors. Then, are xml:id attributes "DTD-determined IDs" or "schema-determined IDs" ? Q5. What do you mean by "partially validated"? I do not see its definition in XML 1.0 or W3C XML Schema Part 1. Q6. Suppose that a document is partially validated against the associated DTD and this document does not have xml:id errors. Then, are non-validated xml:id attributes "DTD-determined IDs" or "schema-determined IDs" ? Q7. Suppose that a document is partially validated against the associated W3C XML Schema schema and this document does not have xml:id errors. Then, are non-validated xml:id attributes "DTD-determined IDs" or "schema-determined IDs" ? Q8. Suppose that a document is invalid against the associated DTD and it does not have xml:id errors. How should fragment identifiers (esp. bare names) be interpreted? Q9. Suppose that a document is invalid against the associated W3C XML Schema schema and it does not have xml:id errors. How should fragment identifiers (esp. bare names) be interpreted? I did not mention RELAX NG, since RELAX NG does not have any in-band mechanisms for associating an XML document with an authoritative RELAX NG schema. (This omission is deliberate.) I thus believe that we do not to consider RELAX NG. Cheers, Makoto > The XML Core WG asked me to make you aware of our continuing work on > an xml:id specification as it may have some impact on RFC 3023. In > fact, I don't personally believe that it does. A document for which > xml:id processing has been performed will simply have more attributes > of type "ID" that can be identified by barename fragment identifiers. > > However, if you feel there is any impact that we may have overlooked, > please let us know. You can find the current editors draft at > > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xmlid/xml-id.html > > Note that a new draft is expected later today. -- MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <EB2M-MRT@asahi-net.or.jp>
Received on Friday, 22 October 2004 15:13:49 UTC