• To: michael.h.kay@n...
• Subject: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
• From: "K. Ari Krupnikov" <ari@c...>
• Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:34:21 +0000
• Cc: "'Jonathan Borden'" <jborden@m...>, "'David Brownell'" <david-b@p...>, xml-dev@l...
• References: <000101c16c29$8dabccb0$ddc469d5@pcukmka>
• Sender: kari@c...

Michael Kay wrote:
> 
> > Ok I stand corrected. Internal subsets are easy to use and
> > well supported as
> > you and john cowan, michael kay and others say.
> >
> > So why do we need _another_ mechanism to declare IDs?
> >
> Well, one reason is that an XML document produced as the output of an XSLT
> transformation will never have an internal subset.

Maybe that should be fixed in XSLT, not in XML?

Ari.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>

• References:
  • RE: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be betterthanIDs...
• Next by Date: RE: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
• Previous by thread: RE: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
• Next by thread: RE: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread