[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wss] xml:id proposal
I support Frederick's proposal, nominally as-amended by Paul. In terms of the proposed ammendments to the proposal, on item (3), in terms of the proposed revised text, there is a SHOULD and a MAY that ought to be capitalized... Tokens and elements that are defined in this specification and related profiles to use wsu:Id attributes SHOULD do so, additional profiles and other elements to be signed MAY choose to use xml:id or wsu:Id. ... WRT this assertion.. > Rationale: We cannot make support of xml:id mandatory since it breaks > backwards compatibility with WSS 1.0 and it is inappropriate to force > implementers to support xml:id so soon after it becomes a > Recommendation. ...it has me wondering this meta-question: "what's the point of WSSv1.1 if we don't see any need for folks to update their toolkits? If they're in there changing them, adding support for xml:id likely isn't that hard." i.e. why can't we have language that effective says "All receivers MUST be able to identify XML elements carrying either a wsu:Id or an xml:id attribute" ? But, I can live with it being a "SHOULD". I will not be able to make the Tue 6-Sep WSSTC concall, unfortunately, due to travel. If a decision on this proposal comes down to a roll-call vote, I request it done via email or punted to the next meeting. I don't know if I personally will have regained voting privs in any case, but I understand that various folks may not be able to make this coming Tues meeting (eg this Mon is a US holiday), and would like to see this issue get the broadest participation we can provide as I think it has long-term subtle-but-important implications. thanks, JeffH
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]