- From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
- Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 08:26:31 +0200
- To: public-xml-id@w3.org
Hi,
I have few comments on this WD which I think is meeting a real need.
* I think that you should add a definition in your Terminology
section stating that unless otherwise qualified, the word
"processor" means a XML processor compliant to the xml:id
specification (otherwise, people can read that spec as a
modification of the XML rec.).
* You make a reference to XML 1.0 but do not mention XML 1.1. It
might be a good idea to mention if it applies to XML 1.1 as well
(I don't why it couldn't)
* (#id-strictness) I really don't like the idea of non validating
parsers having to report errors when a XML document is well
formed but the xml:id is mis-used. I'd prefer that you say that
non validating parsers may report errors and add a comment
suggesting that they add properties to switch this error
reporting on and off.
* The fact that xml:id relies on the XML infoset restricts its
scope to XML documents that are conform to namespaces in XML. Is
that really needed? xml:space and xml:lang on one hand and DTD
IDs on the other hand work for any XML document, why couldn't it
be the case for xml:id?
Thanks for that spec,
Eric
--
Did you know it? Python has now a Relax NG (partial) implementation.
http://advogato.org/proj/xvif/
Upcoming XML schema languages tutorial:
- Amsterdam -half day- (18/04/2004) http://masl.to/?P220516D7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(ISO) RELAX NG ISBN:0-596-00421-4 http://oreilly.com/catalog/relax
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 9 April 2004 02:26:39 UTC