• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: annotations outside validation
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: 13 Nov 2001 09:09:03 -0500

All this discussion of IDs is making me wonder if maybe it isn't time to
consider creating a class of attributes which aren't considered for
validation of any kind, DTD or schema.

Recipe:

Make a magic namespace and fix a prefix for it.  (Maybe xmlm for XML
magic.)

Tell validators not to touch anything in that namespace.

Sprinkle as desired.


Yeah, I know it's a stupid idea, fraught with all kinds of dangerous
consequences, incompatibilities, and other difficult issues.

On the other hand, we seem to constantly get stuck on all kinds of
issues as we move into discussions where additional post-validation
information is necessary, and we seem to just go around that in circles.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
"Every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: annotations outside validation
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
  • magic competition (was Re: annotations outside validation)
    • From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
• Next by Date: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better thanIDs...
• Previous by thread: Re: [ANN] Online HTML to XML Conversion Service
• Next by thread: Re: annotations outside validation
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread