XML Editor - Download a Free Trial >
See What's New >
Buy Now >

[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]

  • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
  • To: xml-dev@l...
  • Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:42:28 +0100
On 29/04/2011 15:22, David Lee wrote:
000001cc0678$eb8277a0$c28766e0$@calldei.com" type="cite">

First off I know asking "Why" for anything standards related is silly.

 

But given that, could anyone give me a rationale or history for restricting xml:id (or the ID type from DTD) to be NCName which then has to start with non-numeric ?



I seem to recall asking this once, and being told that the history lay in the SGML rules for abbreviated syntax. Something like allowing <e id="xyz"/> to be abbreviated as <e xyz>. Not that this in itself would make a numeric identifier ambiguous, but it would account for requiring an ID value to have the same syntax as an attribute name.

I guess another justification is that it prevents any debate about whether xml:id="01234" is a duplicate of xml:id="1234".

Michael Kay
Saxonica
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

XML Editor - Download a 15 Day Free Trial Now >
See What's New in Stylus Studio >
Buy Stylus Studio - XML Editor - Now >
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member