Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
David Carlisle wrote: > > > > Why would one need to redeclare an ID in the internal subset which is > > already declared in the external DTD. Its already an ID right? > > > Isn't that the whole point of this thread? No, at least that is not _my_ point. When I suggest internal subset ID declarations, it is simply to point out that we already have an implemented but arguably imperfect syntax to declare document specific IDs. > > > Again, my point about using internal declarations of IDs is for documents > > which don't have an external DTD. If you are using an external DTD you can > > always declare a short DTD driver which [expletive deleted] in docbook+mathml + whatever > > and defines the new IDs your particular application desires > > No. That isn't how the web works. I stick up a document and I have no > idea what application is going to be reading it, but I know that that > application might not read the external subset of the dtd 'cause that's > how it is specified in the XML rec. > Right, but this application must also understand that it will _only_ be able to understand identifiers that are implicit to the application, i.e. a _docbook_ application has knowledge of a _docbook identifier_ regardless of whether a validating parser is used. The vast majority of HTML parsers never touch the DTD yet seem to handle <a href="#foo"> just fine. If you are asking for a _generic_ processor that understands IDs regardless of some magical internal knowledge of every application that exists and every that will someday exists, then _this application must parse and process the DTD_. *** Jonathan *** When I use the capitalized term "ID" I mean ID as defined in XML 1.0.
|
