• From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 00:53:33 -0500 (EST)

Paul Prescod scripsit:

> In fact, I'll go so far as to say that it does NOT make sense. SGML goes
> *too far* in this direction: the ID/IDREF mechanism should be treated at a
> separate level, like other integrity constraints.

IMHO the purpose of ID/IDREF is to express non-hierarchical data using
hierarchical notation.  Appropriate use of ID and IDREF attributes
allows the representation of any directed graph, whether acyclic or
cyclic.

-- 
John Cowan					cowan@c...
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.

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...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Internal subset equivalent in new schema proposals?
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• References:
  • Re: Internal subset equivalent in new schema proposals?
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Why XML data typing is hard (was Re: Internal subset equivalent in new schema proposals?)
• Next by Date: Re: Why XML data typing is hard (was Re: Internal subset equivalent in new schema proposals?)
• Previous by thread: Re: Internal subset equivalent in new schema proposals?
• Next by thread: Re: Internal subset equivalent in new schema proposals?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread