W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-xtech@w3.org > August 2002

Re: Xpointer

From: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 06:02:53 +0100 (BST)
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
cc: WAI Cross-group list <wai-xtech@w3.org>, jim@jibbering.com
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0208050547520.12507-100000@jarl.webthing.com>

On Sun, 4 Aug 2002, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:

> Sent to xtech because it is a public list and talking about ideas based on a
> public spec (the last call spec http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-framework/ on which
> comments are formally overdue - sorry)
> A possible issue, more related to EARL, with the Xpointer spec...
> It is mor reliable (given smart editors) to point to an ID than another kind
> of reference. Perhaps we should suggest that an Xpointer SHOULD point to an
> ID rather than another kind of pointer where possible. This could be checked
> automatically by testing whether the element in question, so could be a
> syntactically testable constraint.
> What do people think?

Charles, have you been looking at my new EARL[1] stuff, or are we just
thinking in parallel?

It is indeed possible for a tool to generate its own IDs for every
node in a DOM, and use these internally to reference them.  An EARL
tool can also export them, provided it makes available the IDs themselves
(as in my latest tool[1]) and/or machine-readable instructions for
reconsructing them as previously discussed ([2], etc).  The former
simplifies a document snapshot, whereas the latter is still
necessary if we want rubustness across document changes.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-er-ig/2002Jul/0031.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-er-ig/2002Jul/0017.html

Nick Kew
Received on Monday, 5 August 2002 01:02:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:51:28 UTC