On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 12:29:42 -0400
"G. Ken Holman" <gkholman(_at_)CraneSoftwrights(_dot_)com> wrote:
I don't follow your argument, Dave. An input document's identifiers
have *no* relationship to generate-id().
Lets agree to differ on that one then Ken.
Consider this: if your reasoning that generate-id() must produce a
value set exclusive of the xml:id values to ensure that id values in
the output are unique,
No, I haven't said that.
this falls apart when you consider that the
aggregation of two documents where each are independently (and
validly) using the same value for xml:id=.
Agreed. I won't go into how. I'm suggesting that amongst the present
xml:id values in the input document, the generated id values must
be as defined, i.e. unique.
However, if you follow my rule of thumb that *every* xml:id= or id=
or ID-typed attribute named prod= (for example) is translated to
output using the generate-id() for that node ... and every reference
to those identifiers is replaced with the generated identifier for
the referenced node, then the references will be both preserved and
unambiguous in the result.
which is a lot of work. Fine if you want to do it.
As to the earlier comment contributed regarding pointers from outside
of the document to inside the document,
oo scope IMHO
Therefore, generate-id() is necessarily independent of any knowledge
of any content.
In which case it's badly named Ken. Quite unlike James?
--
regards
--
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--