Re: updated internet draft: "URI Fragment Identifiers for the text/plain Media Type"

hello roy.

thanks for your comments.

 > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/1997Oct/0043.html

pretty old, this one...

 > I am adamently opposed to using ^ as an escape character when percent
 > escaping is more than sufficient for that purpose.  The carat isn't
 > even allowed by the URI syntax.
 > Use of balanced parentheses is a mistake.  A simple left-to-right
 > delimited syntax is easier to implement:
 >      fred#line=30;char=20-45
 > and then precent-escape ";" and "=" if needed as data.  Parser reuse
 > is a good thing.

i agree that parser reuse is a good thing. and this is why i chose the 
scheme syntax, which has been introduced by xpointer (and is very likely 
to be accepted as a w3c recommendation) and which is currently being 
worked on in draft-borden-frag-00. however, i am not religious about 
this, and i could also live with the admittedly simpler syntax you proposed.

personally, i like the "traditional syntax" roy is voting for better 
than the "scheme-based syntax", but apart from escaping issues (which 
can be solved in both cases) it is mainly a matter of taste. and of 
guidelines, of course, iff draft-borden-frag-00 becomes the way how 
fragment iudentifiers will look in the future, then we should go with 
that option. any opinions?

cheers,

erik wilde  -  tel:+41-1-6325132  -  fax:+41-1-6321035
           mailto:net.dret@dret.net -  http://dret.net/
           computer engineering and networks laboratory
           swiss federal institute of technology  (eth)
           * try not. do, or do not. there is no try. *

Received on Friday, 9 August 2002 03:37:56 UTC