W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > October to December 2000

Re: XPointer and XHTML

From: Matthew Wilson <matthew@mjwilson.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 08:15:53 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: "Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@east.sun.com>
Cc: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
At 22:42 09/11/00 -0500, Eve L. Maler wrote:
>Fragment identifier languages are associated with media types, per RFC 
>2396.  That is, we don't have any control over how XHTML is served, but if 
>it is served as */xml, then an XPointer is supposed to work with it.  This 
>is just the nature of Web architecture...  However, you can see the seeds 
>of an idea to get more flexibility in the notion of XPointer "schemes."
>         Eve

I just feel it is important that XPointer 1.0 be compatible with XHTML 
(even if that means adding schemes to it) - after all it is perfectly 
capable of addressing parts of XHTML documents.

Matthew Wilson

>At 10:25 PM 11/9/00 +0000, Matthew Wilson wrote:
>>I may be missing the point here, but...
>>XPointer introduction says that it applies to
>>  "a resource of Internet media type text/xml or application/xml"
>>XHTML is agnostic about its media type...
>>"...general recommended MIME labeling for XML-based applications has yet 
>>to be resolved."
>>"XHTML Documents " ... "may be labeled with the Internet Media Type 
>>So XPointer may or may not be usable with XHTML, is that correct?
>>This seems to be quite a severe shortcoming (assuming my interpretation 
>>is right). I think that the acceptance of XLink/XPointer technologies 
>>will be affected by how easily they can be added to those already existing.
>>Matthew Wilson
>Eve Maler                                          +1 781 442 3190
>Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center    eve.maler @ east.sun.com
Received on Friday, 10 November 2000 03:16:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:22 UTC