• To: "'Jonathan Borden'" <jborden@m...>,"'David Brownell'" <david-b@p...>
• Subject: RE: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
• From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:57:05 -0000
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <01a101c16bd5$1435f0d0$0a2e249b@n...>
• Reply-to: <michael.h.kay@n...>

> 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.

Mike Kay

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
    • From: "K. Ari Krupnikov" <ari@c...>

• References:
  • Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• 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