Subject: RE: [xsl] keys and idrefs - XSLT2 request? From: Wendell Piez <wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:41:13 -0400 |
Wendell wrote: > I think it'd be a tall order to get much consensus on IDREFS being so > special that the definition of key() should be stretched that > far (even > broken, since it makes its functionality very different > depending on a > DTD's being parsed). This would be a source of much > confusion, I imagine, > and also complaints since many users simply wouldn't > understand or accept > the rationale for the design.
Which makes them exactly on a par with id attributes vs ID attributes? Don't tell me you've never been puzzled by missing cross references when you don't have the DTD to hand?
I ought to start an faq section entitled come here when you're desperate. I could include Mike Kays subtleties on namespaces, missing/mistyped namespaces in a stylesheet, lack of DTD with screwed up cross references etc.
I'm sure there are more.
Anyway, that's why IDREFS make a special case, despite our many users of well formed not valid XML.
Cheers, Wendell
====================================================================== Wendell Piez mailto:wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com 17 West Jefferson Street Direct Phone: 301/315-9635 Suite 207 Phone: 301/315-9631 Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 301/315-8285 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML ======================================================================
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] keys and idrefs - XSLT2 r, Joerg Pietschmann | Thread | RE: [xsl] keys and idrefs - XSLT2 r, Joerg Pietschmann |
Re: [xsl] keys and idrefs - XSLT2 r, Jeni Tennison | Date | RE: [xsl] xslt namespace, Julian Reschke |
Month |