[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [office-collab] Possible UC7 for consideration...
On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 18:12 +0000, John Haug wrote: > Ben: Even when the result is two begin annotation XML elements with > the same name? > > My thinking here was that it is up to the application to ensure it > doesn’t duplicate names if that’s not allowed. Same as the myriad > other places that rule applies. Dennis points out it’s not an ID and > doesn’t have the same kind of document validation baggage an ID would, > though 19.376.6 does require the name must be unique for each pair of > annotation / annotation-end. The ID question you raise sounds like > the question your UC8 raises. That also seems to me to be a largely > straightforward case of the app needing to be aware of names/IDs in > use and not introduce duplicates. One subtle difference between rewriting an xml:id and changing the begin/end name occurs to me. For the xml:id case, when making a bucket you can add new RDF to make sure the things linked to the old (existing) xml:id are linked to the new xml:id used in the bucket. If you update the name used for the begin XML element for a bookmark or annotation then there is no longer a matching end XML element for it. So you either get two begin markers with the same name or a begin marker without an end marker.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]