W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > February 2005

RE: [XSLT 2.0] media types and fragment ids and the document() function

From: Michael Kay <mhk@mhk.me.uk>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 10:41:24 -0000
To: "'Colin Paul Adams'" <colin@colina.demon.co.uk>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E1D3XUQ-0001f1-6t@frink.w3.org>

The direct answer is that the WG hasn't discussed your comment directly,
though it has held many discussions on the issues of media types and
fragment identifiers, and the problems you describe are well known.

I think we have to stick to the party line on this, which is that fragment
identifiers are interpreted according to the specification of the media
type. Until the people that define these media types get their act together,
implementations are just going to have to improvise as best they can; it's
not the role of the XSLT specification to tell implementors how to plug the
gaps in the web infrastructure.

Michael Kay (personal response). 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Colin 
> Paul Adams
> Sent: 16 February 2005 18:32
> To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> Subject: [XSLT 2.0] media types and fragment ids and the 
> document() function
> 
> 
> Have the WG considered my Decemeber posting on this topic?
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2004Dec
> /0022.html
> -- 
> Colin Paul Adams
> Preston Lancashire
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 22 February 2005 10:42:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:14:37 GMT