- From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:00:07 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
At 07:24 2003 10 05 +0200, Chris Lilley wrote: >Hello www-tag, > >I have updated the draft finding "How should the problem of >identifying ID semantics in XML languages be addressed in the absence >of a DTD?" >http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/xmlIDsemantics-32.html In various places before section 7 you seem to suggest that one can get ID typing equally from DTDs and XML Schemas. It's not until the fourth paragraph of section 7 that you note "[t]he fact that a type ID declared in a DTD is not exactly equivalent to a type ID declared in a W3C XML Schema...." It might be useful to expand on this point a bit more. The difference at the infoset level is that DTD processing causes the [attribute type] infoset property to be set to ID whereas XML Schema processing sets the type to xs:ID via the [type definition] family of PSVI properties. If some processor that currently consumes infosets (perhaps via SAX events or some other API) only looks at the [attribute type] infoset property to determine IDness (as it quite likely the case in many currently existing processors), then conflating the "IDness" conferred by a DTD and that conferred by XML Schema is misleading. This difference adds an important disadvantage to the XML Schema solution in my opinion: it would not automatically work with existing tools that assume IDness is determined solely by the [attribute type] infoset property (or equivalent) and would therefore increase the adoption overhead. paul
Received on Sunday, 5 October 2003 13:01:27 UTC