- From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@topologi.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:43:43 +1100
- To: <www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org>
While discussing xml:include, links and IDs it may be useful to consider that SGML also has another species of IDREF, the CONREF: an element with a CONREF attribute must be empty, and is substituted with the element pointed to. So in SGML, documents can be declared and traversed as trees, but actually can be acyclic graphs with branches shared. (Similarly with the ENTITY attribute type.) So in SGML the IDREF mechanism is more intended for use in semantic references rather than inclusion-style references. From that POV, it may be possible to see xml:include as an attempt to regain CONREF as well as getting rid of ampersands. The difference is that CONREF has very clear semantics w.r.t validation: if it is not specified the element is validated as per the DTD. Perhaps xml:include would be better if reformulated as CONREF, and therefore providing clearer indication of its position on a processing pipeline w.r.t. validation. (In WXS terms, an element with a CONREF attribute would have to be nillable, and marked up with xsi:nill='true', but no special WXS features would be required: indeed, it would fit on top of keyrefs.) CONREF-aware linking would automatically follow the link, rather than seeing the linking element. This would be a good value add. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2003 07:41:46 UTC