This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 1570 - [XQuery+XSLT] xml:id
Summary: [XQuery+XSLT] xml:id
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Classification: Unclassified
Component: XPath 2.0 (show other bugs)
Version: Last Call drafts
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Don Chamberlin
QA Contact: Mailing list for public feedback on specs from XSL and XML Query WGs
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 1458 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-07-13 18:00 UTC by Michael Kay
Modified: 2005-07-21 16:27 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description Michael Kay 2005-07-13 18:00:09 UTC
There's an unnecessary inconsistency between the XSLT and XQuery specifications
over xml:id. XQuery makes it an error if the value of the attribute isn't a
valid NCName (a static error in the case of a fixed constructor, a dynamic error
otherwise), XSLT doesn't make it an error unless you validate.

I don't care which solution we adopt but let's get them into line.

Note that XSLT permits

<element xml:id="{expr}"/>

while XQuery doesn't.
Comment 1 Mary Holstege 2005-07-20 20:28:25 UTC
At its meeting today, the XSL and XQuery working groups decided to accept this 
comment and align XQuery with XSLT wrt xml:id as follows:

In element construction, both direct and computed, remove the text,	
the string-value of the attribute must be in the lexical space of	
the type xs:NCName [err XQST0082]	
In addition, the word "informally, " can removed, since the prefix must be 
"xml". Or talk abuot xml:id instead of the namespace URI.	
There should also be a reference to the xml:id spec.

I would be grateful if you could confirm your acceptance of this resolution by
marking the bug entry as CLOSED; alternatively, if you have further comments to
make, or if you feel the requirement has been misunderstood, please feel free to
respond to that effect. In the absence of further comments, we will close the 
bug.
Comment 2 Jim Melton 2005-07-21 16:27:42 UTC
*** Bug 1458 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***