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

Re: Rough sketch for an I-D (a successor of RFC 3023)

From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 14:05:06 -0600
Message-Id: <>
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org

At 20:27 2003 10 29 +0100, Chris Lilley wrote:

>On Wednesday, October 29, 2003, 5:24:57 PM, MURATA wrote:

>MM> 3) Fragment identifier
>MM> At present, RFC 3023 says:
>MM>     As of today, no established specifications define identifiers
>MM>     for XML media types. However, a working draft published by
>MM>     W3C, namely "XML Pointer Language (XPointer)", attempts to
>MM>     define fragment identifiers for text/xml and
>MM>     application/xml. The current specification for XPointer is
>MM>     available at http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr.
>MM> We have XPointer recommendations but are not ready to bless 
>MM> XPointer.  We should say so.
>Perhaps the framework and scheme should be pointed to?

That is what the XLink WG recommended [1] and what the
XML Core WG more recently [2] recommends.


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-fragid/
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-core-wg/2003OctDec/0052
  to wit:
 DECISION:  The XML Core WG would like to urge for a revision
 of 3023 that deprecates text/xml and that defines the fragment
 identifier to be what the XLink WG Note suggests:
Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:05:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:40 UTC