Re: [xml] Potential wrong usage of xmlIsID() in tree.c
- From: Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>
- To: Kasimier Buchcik <K Buchcik 4commerce de>
- Cc: Rob Richards <rrichards ctindustries net>, ML-libxml2 <xml gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [xml] Potential wrong usage of xmlIsID() in tree.c
- Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:15:37 -0500
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 03:05:46PM +0100, Kasimier Buchcik wrote:
[ ... cut an invalid example ... ]
According to Daniel, the IDness based on DTDs can really be queried by a
element/attribute combination, without caring if at overall valid
So maybe we could advance by looking at the second option: making the
DTD based detection optional.
DTD loading itself is optional, ID detection can't be garanteed.
However IDness is really the result of checking (element name/attribute name)
in the DTD (or internal subset) when inserted in the document.
Thanks for the clarification. After your follow up message I thought you
meant that detection in general was broken.
I just saw your latest message and I was about to propose something
exactly along those lines. This way if it defaulted to enabled then
libxml2 could operate as intended. In the case using the lib to
implement DOM, it could be disabled and ID detection work as we have
kind of layed out in these messages. Is it possible to extend the
document node to include flags? This way it might also serve any future
need to provide some instructions or indications on the state of the
Daniel, could we have that flag field on xmlDoc?
Explain clearly the semantic of it. A priori I'm not too fond of it
if we start having different data structure based on what is using the
library we just make debugging on bug reports near impossible.
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat http://redhat.com/
veillard redhat com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
] [Thread Prev