- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 14:18:26 -0800
- To: <www-tag@w3.org>
Paul, Sure XPointer looks at the infoset. But how does the infoset get the idattr property? If I build a streaming parser for XPointer that uses xml:idattr, I've got to scan every element for an idattr attribute when looking for IDs. For example: <myxml> <child1> <grandchild1> <greatgrandchild xml:idattr="name"> <greatgreatgrandchild name="3"> I'm not saying this is an insurmountable problem. It just is a deficiency. Though this deficiency would be somewhat nullified if xml:base was also adopted, as the parser has to scan for both base and idattr attributes. Cheers, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: www-tag-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of > Paul Grosso > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 1:57 PM > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: RE: Options for dealing with IDs > > > > At 13:45 2003 01 07 -0800, David Orchard wrote: > > >Another potential aspect to look at is how XPointer would > deal with these > >various approaches. Perhaps show how XPointer is affected by each, > >particularly for bare names. For example, Option #1, #8 has the > >disadvantage that it means XPointer requires DTD or Schema > validation. > >Option #5, #6 has the disadvantage that the XPointer parser > has to look at > >the xml:idattr to figure out what the id attribute name is. > > I don't think XPointer looks at xml:idattr any more than > it looks at, say, xml:base. It looks at the infoset. > > All we'd have to say in a new little xml:id-ish spec > is that xml:idattr adds a few pieces of information to > the infoset (that, to date, only comes from the DTD), > and there need be no change to XPointer. > > paul > >
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2003 17:19:15 UTC