Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
>Two nits: > >1) The More element should be optional (needs a "?"). Totally correct. Will be fixed quickly. >2) Why is id optional? Is this to allow people to decide for themselves >if they want to be reused? I have a few problems with requiring id. First, I'm still one of those terrible hand-coders. Being required to come up with an ID for every piece is a hassle, especially for bits I'll never reuse. This is not, of course, an issue for the authoring tools that will someday (hopefully) take over the landscape. Second, I know I can grab the same info with an XPointer without needing to go to an ID. It may not be as quick, and the final syntax may be a little murky, but I'm sure the functionality will be there. I think id should be there - it makes life much easier for authoring and management programs. I don't see a compelling reason to require it, given the improvements in linking that XPointer makes possible. There may, of course, be such a need that I haven't found yet. Simon St.Laurent Dynamic HTML: A Primer / XML: A Primer / Cookies xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
