- From: Allan Beaufour <beaufour@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:20:29 +0200
- To: "David Landwehr" <david.landwehr@solidapp.com>
- Cc: www-forms@w3.org
On 4/4/06, David Landwehr <david.landwehr@solidapp.com> wrote: > Allan Beaufour wrote: > > On 4/3/06, Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivedesigners.com > > <Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivedesigners.com> wrote: > >> 2) What would it mean if an xsd:ID type were assigned directly to the > >> element's content by an xsi:type attribute or a schema? > >> > >> If you read 3.3.8 ID of the 'XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition' > >> : "... For compatibility (see Terminology (§1.4)) ID should be used only > >> on attributes." > >> > >> Therefore I think this should be discouraged in our spec, or left > >> Implementation dependant > >> > > > > Hmm, that is unfortunate. So, yes at least we should discourage that. > > > > I think that the backwards compatibility is about DTDs and since XForms > does not rely much on DTDs but a lot on XML Schema it should be > perfectly valid (and expected) that someone would want to assign xsd:ID > to an element and then use the id function to retrieve it. So I think > this should not be discourage nor should it be left implementation > dependent. Even though XML Schema discourage assigning IDs to anything > but attributes then the behavior is still well defined and must work > across schema validators. Ok, ff DTDs are the reason for backwards compatibility, I guess it makes sense for us to relax that constraint. -- ... Allan
Received on Tuesday, 4 April 2006 12:20:40 UTC