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

[Bug 5744] Improved Fragment Identifiers

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:39:00 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1KAAnU-0001tv-1v@wiggum.w3.org>

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





--- Comment #39 from Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>  2008-06-21 21:38:59 ---
(In reply to comment #38)
> (In reply to comment #36)
> > (In reply to comment #33)
> > > ...
> > > there is no other spec for fragment identifiers. there is the old html4 spec,
> > Actually, there are, both in IETF land (for text/html and
> > application/xhtml+xml), and in W3C land:
> > 
> > - RFC 2854 currently defines fragment identifiers for text/html, based on the
> > HTML 4.01 spec 
> > 
> > - RFC 3236 currently defines fragment identifiers for application/xhtml+xml,
> > based on RFC 3023 (XML media types)
> > 
> > - There's also NOTE-xhtml-media-types-20020801 which probably should be updated
> > when HTML5 is ready
> > 
> > (<http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5744#c22>)
> > 
> > The question is whether it's in scope for us to update these specs (and yes, I
> > think it is). 
> 
> OK, then that's something actionable. Julian, can you please raise in issue in
> the group Tracker for this?

To be precise, what I meant to ask was, could you please raise an issue in the
group tracker stating, "Need to update RFC 2954, RFC 3236, and
NOTE-xhtml-media-types-20020801 when HTML5 is ready".


-- 
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 Saturday, 21 June 2008 21:39:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 21 June 2008 21:39:34 GMT