- From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:54:43 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
At 20:12 2003 05 12 +0200, Chris Lilley wrote: >[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/xmlIDSemantics-32-20030512.html With respect to: >The concept of IDness, which exists in well formed documents, should be distinguished from the three validation constraints that XML places on IDs: > >Validity constraint: ID >Values of type ID must match the Name production. A name must not appear more than once in an XML document as a value of this type; i.e., ID values must uniquely identify the elements which bear them. in [1], I'm not sure how to read this. I understand separating the determination that something *has* IDness from validation. My question is what you want "having IDness" to mean. I don't think this document makes that clear. In particular, the above quote is apparently trying to say some things that IDness *isn't*. It seems to be saying that IDness doesn't mean uniqueness of this name in the document--which might or might not make sense--but it also seems to be saying that IDness doesn't mean the value has to match the Name production. Do you really mean this? I would imagine that calling something with a space in it, for example, an ID would break lots of things, and I wouldn't think you'd want to allow that. You can't appeal just to XML 1.0 for the answer, since XML 1.0 doesn't define IDness separate from attribute declaration processing (which you don't want to require). I would assume the best answer appeals to the Infoset. Something like: IDness of an attribute means that that attribute's Attribute Information Item in the document's infoset has an [attribute type] property that has the value "ID". If that isn't your definition of IDness (and even if it is), I think this document needs to expand on the meaning of IDness. paul
Received on Monday, 16 June 2003 18:02:26 UTC