[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Proposed resolution for #21: duplicateAttributes
> Here is my propsal: This is not an error. Implementations > MAY issue error messages. If the spec is going to say "Implementations may issue error messages for duplicate attributes", then the spec has to define exactly what constitutes a duplicate attribute. How should it do this? I am also concerned that this will create interoperability problems (like the ambiguity constraint in XML). Either it should be an error and implementations should be required to detect it, or it should not be an error and implementations should be required to accept it. Could one not impose some simple constraint that would not require GNF normalization to implement? For example, something like saying that in <group> p1 p2 </group> the set of possible attribute names occurring in p1 must be disjoint from those occurring in p2. James
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC