Re: Annotation issue: other attribute types

[Murata Makoto <mura034@attglobal.net>]

James Clark wrote:

> Should we allow a:attributeType to take values other than ID/IDREF/IDREFS?
> 
> For example, one could allow it to take the value of NOTATION or ENTITY, 
> which would imply the same checking that XML 1.0 does (ie that it would 
> refer to an ENTITY or NOTATION declared in the DTD of the document not in 
> the schema).
> 
> Even NMTOKEN and NMTOKENS could be useful for infoset modification 
> (attribute value normalization) that they imply.

I personally do not care NOTATION, ENTITY, NMTOKEN, or NMTOKENS.  Even if 
we allow NOTATION and ENTITY as values of a:attributeType, we still need 
entity and notation declarations in DTDs.  Thus, we cannot completely 
migrate from DTDs to RELAX NG, but have to use DTD, RELAX NG, and annotations
together.

We do not normalize " 1   3 " (<list><data type="short"/><data type="short"/></list>) 
as "1 3".  Thus, I do not care NMTOKEN or NMTOKENS.

But I can go either way.

Cheers,

Makoto