Re: [xml] Potential wrong usage of xmlIsID() in tree.c

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 04:05:21PM +0100, Kasimier Buchcik wrote:
> > > 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
>
> Such a flag would enable/disable the attribute creation/addition
> functions to perform an automatic ID-detection based on a DTD.
>
> I have thought about what we already have for using DOM on top
> of Libxml2.
>
> Proposal:
> We could integrate the needed ID semantics for DOM
> into: xmlDOMWrapRemoveNode(), xmlDOMWrapAdoptNode() and
> xmlDOMWrapCloneNode().
> What we are missing in this set of DOM functions is a
> xmlDOMWrapAddNode() function, which would implement the desired ID
> handling - based on the given options.
>
> This way we wouldn't need any additional settings on the xmlDoc - just
> inside the wrapper itself. A tiny beautiful island, full of DOM.

  If you really need to add a new function to the API then okay,
it's still way better than different behaviour based on a flag somewhere.

Daniel

-- 
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/