• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• From: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@S...>
• Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 11:16:32 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@m...]
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 11:00 AM
> To: Champion, Mike; xml-dev@l...
> Subject: Re:  So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
> 

> so what am I missing?

Maybe nothing, except my wistful hope that we really can do this kind of
thing with WF XML syntax  rather than DTD syntax someday... this is
definitely not a Big Deal, just a nice little tweak that could prove useful
to those of us addicted to getElementById() in the HTML environment and too
constrained or lazy to mess with defining a DTD or schema just for the sake
of using this one feature in XML.  I think I can live with the DTD internal
subset solution ... that probably suffices for 80% of my own use cases until
the W3C can consider xml:id-ish enhancements in the Fullness of Time. 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• Next by Date: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• Previous by thread: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• Next by thread: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread