Entities in XSchema
cowan at locke.ccil.org
Wed Jun 10 18:56:52 BST 1998
Paul Prescod wrote:
> instance, do we want a single ID namespace as XML/DTD has? Or do we want
> one namespace per attribute? The latter seems more powerful to me!
I don't think it is, or at least you haven't shown so below.
> So a
> "FIG" element could have both a FIGID and an ID. The FIGID might be only
> available on "FIG" elements, and thus a unique identifier for classes,
> without invading the namespace of "EXAMPLEs". Note that I use the word
> namespace in a sense more or less unrelated to that of the "namespaces"
I used the term "IDspace" in a previous posting. However, your
FIGID value can be just an ID value if it is prefixed with "FIG-"; where
you would assign a FIG-unique FIGID value, just assign a prefixed
and document-unique ID value.
(One could get broader than that and qualify all ID values with the
URI of the document to which they belong, thus making them
globally unique, but URIs don't offer strong enough guarantees
> IDREF should also be more powerful. It should allow full XPointers (though
> an XSchema processor might only check local ones).
This is rebuilding XLink. ID/IDREF have the advantage of being
very small and very cheap.
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org
You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn.
You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn.
Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev