- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:43:23 +0200
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: public-xml-id@w3.org
On Tuesday, April 19, 2005, 8:16:53 PM, Dan wrote: DC> This section "Impacts on Other Standards" is great... DC> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/CR-xml-id-20050208/#impact DC> I see DC> "Informed readers that C Impacts on Other Standards will be removed DC> before xml:id becomes a recommendation" DC> Hmm... well, it would be great to remove the "Impacts..." stuff DC> because it's all taken care of, but looking at a draft DC> implementation report... DC> http://www.w3.org/XML/2005/01/xml-id-implementation.html DC> ... I don't see, for example, a test corresponding to DC> this ID selectors test... DC> http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS3/Selectors/current/xhtml/tests/css3-modsel-15.xml I agree that there is a grave risk of a 'falling between two stools' here. If XML core says its not their job to test xml:id in CSs selectors, and CSS says its not their job to test xml:id in CSS selectors, then it is not tested. DC> Before removing the "Impacts..." section, please at least DC> add a link from the implementation report to something DC> from the CSS WG that says "yes... good question... we'll DC> look into that." As a minimum requirement. DC> I can't tell if the intent is that the CSS specs get revised DC> to refer to xml:ID or if CSS implementations are to independently DC> pick up xml:ID support or what. The current spec is kinda waffly, DC> as far as I can tell... I recall asking that question too (about DOM getElementById as well) DC> "Document languages may contain attributes that are declared to be of DC> type ID." is pretty waffly DC> http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2-19980512/selector.html#id-selectors DC> I haven't looked into DOM, XPath, etc. as closely, but the concern DC> applies. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2005 18:43:27 UTC