[rfc-i] XML/HTML format: anchor namespaces

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Sat Feb 27 08:55:48 PST 2016

On 2016-02-27 17:41, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On 27 Feb 2016, at 2:49, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> We need to somehow manage collisions. I can think of some:
>> 1) Have a hard-wired list of IDs that can not be used in the XML
>> source. This will be tricky to maintain and explain, and will break
>> existing XML.
>> 2) Rewrite author ids that collide with auto-generated ones; that may
>> lead to surprising results when people try to link to certain items;
>> it'll also be problematic if formatters for different output formats
>> (say, HTML and PDF), rewrite them inconsistently.
>> 3) Have all system-generated IDs use a common, reserved, prefix, such
>> as "rfc." (maybe with a small number of exceptions, for things like
>> "sec-....").
> Are the rules in section B.2.1 of the v3 vocabulary document not
> sufficient? FWIW, we don't really care about "breaking existing XML" for
> a few edge cases, only if we are breaking many of them. We (meaning that
> you were involved) wrote the rules in B.2.1 to minimize breakage.

See my other reply; I missed that part -- will review and sorry for that.

Best regards, Julian

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list