W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2003

RE: XPointer [was: First Draft of summary of TAG issue abstractComponentRefs-37]

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 09:19:31 -0700
To: "'Paul Grosso'" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <025e01c2ff80$64cbcd90$420ba8c0@beasys.com>

whoops.  I guess that would make that would make option #4 somewhat less
appealing.

Thanks, I'll make sure to change the summary.

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> Paul Grosso
> Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 7:16 AM
> To: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: XPointer [was: First Draft of summary of TAG issue
> abstractComponentRefs-37]
>
>
>
> At 21:59 2003 04 09 -0700, dorchard@bea wrote:
>
> >4. Use full XPointer.  The sample URI is
> >http://airline.wsdl/ticketagent/#xmlns((w=http://schemas.xmls
> oap.org/wsdl/)x
> >pointer(//w:portType[@name="TicketAgent"]/w:operation[@name="
> listFlights"]/w
> >:input[@name="listFlightsRequest"])
> >
> >Pros:
> >- re-use XPointer syntax, which is a rec
>
> No, it [1] is not.
>
> It is not even at Last Call yet, and there is no currently
> existing working group responsible for working on it.
>
> paul
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xptr-xpointer-20021219/
>
>
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2003 12:44:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:17 GMT