Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Monday 12 November 2001 04:42 am, Eric van der Vlist wrote: > On one hand, the concept of ID seems to be very useful and we obviously > need unique IDs to avoid ambiguity. My experience is that context is usually far more useful... > RDBMs have been able to break through because in a sense, they've thrown > IDs away... Or should I say, they've allowed (or imposed) to every query > to specify the "IDs" to use in its where clause. ... > To deal with the compexity and with the performance issues, RDBMS have > invented indexes which are "out of band information" and XSLT has > already dealt with this issue through keys: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt#key Right. The reason why I dislike the idea of special casing ID's is because in practice, I've found them to be of little value. The fragment-id discussion is a sideline issue to the core point: that you don't *need* ID-ness in order to process a document. Document context and unique (within a scope) attribute values suffice.
|
