W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > June 2008

[Bug 5744] Improved Fragment Identifiers

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:08:14 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1K7FZG-0000tU-Kr@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5744


Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|NEEDSINFO                   |WONTFIX




--- Comment #3 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>  2008-06-13 20:08:14 ---
> that's correct, but kind of a tautology, because nowadays it's the only option
> that people have. whether people are dealing "fine" or not is kind of hard to
> say, but it is hard to build better tools (such as a browser providing the
> capability to create more specific links) when the spec does not support that
> because only @id elements can be used as fragment identifiers.

Historically, Web authors have found incredibly ingenious ways of working
around the slightest limitation when there's something they want to solve.
Plugins get developed (e.g. Flash video) to fill holes in the specs, people
develop massive widget libraries to get around the lack of native widgets, etc.
It is rare that a feature is needed without lots of people finding a workaround
and using it.


> http://www.codedread.com/fxpointer/ is an attempt to do something about it

Yeah, that's the kind of thing I mean. Does it have many users?


>> Are user agents willing to actually implement this?
> i don't know

Getting browsers to be ok with implementing something is one of the first
things we have to do.


I guess I'm not convinced that there is a real need here, and that even if
there is a need, that it's not already solved by XPointer. We shouldn't be
reinventing the wheel just because we're not sure we like the current spec --
we should work with that spec to make it better.

So in conclusion I recommend approaching the XPointer group and asking them to
make the improvements you feel it needs, possibly simplifying it if necessary,
or explicitly saying it should work with HTML if that isn't already the case.

If you disagree with this conclusion, please either show what information I
overlooked in reaching my conclusion, or, if you agree with the facts but
disagree with the interpretation of the facts, raise this issue with one of our
chairs. Thanks!


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 13 June 2008 20:08:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 13 June 2008 20:08:57 GMT