W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > May 2003

Re: My opinion on the problem of identifying ID semantics

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 16:38:02 +0200
Message-ID: <22267961656.20030513163802@w3.org>
To: EB2M-MRT@asahi-net.or.jp (Murata Makoto)
CC: www-tag@w3.org

On Tuesday, May 13, 2003, 6:18:19 AM, Murata wrote:


MM> I think that a lont-term solution is to develop an 
MM> independent language for specifying integrity constraints.
MM> That language should be developed on the basis of 
MM> recent research such as Wenfei Fan's works [1] and [2].

Thanks for the references - interesting.

MM> Such a long-term solution takes a lot of time, however.  
MM> We need a short-term solution.  It should not cause any 
MM> problems to long-term solutions.

MM> I believe that xml:id is the best short-term solution.  
MM> It is ad-hoc but does the job at minimum cost.

Yes, it does seem a reasonable tradeoff to me. I have heard some
people argue in favor of it and, significantly, more people arguing
for other solutions but saying they 'could live with' xml:id.


MM> I think that the inline declaration solutions sketched in the
MM> Draft TAG finding document is not powerful as a long-term solution
MM> and takes too much cost as a short-term solution.

Can you provide more detail on both the lack of power and the
increased cost?

Is the cost due to the scoped nature? Because XML already has xml:lang
and xml:base which are also scoped.

MM> [1] http://www.bell-labs.com/user/wenfei/publication.html
MM> [2] http://www.research.avayalabs.com/user/wadler/planx/planx-eproceed/papers/E00-1591816349.ps


-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 13 May 2003 10:38:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:59 UTC