- 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