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

Your comments on XPointer CR

From: Daniel Veillard <Daniel.Veillard@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 18:59:33 +0100
To: Michael Dyck <MichaelDyck@home.com>
Cc: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <20001211185933.F9438@w3.org>
  Michael,

 thank you for your comments on the XPointer CR specification.
I case you didn't already got an answer from the Working Group,
your comments have been taken into consideration and are now listed
in the XPointer CR Disposition of Comments at:
   http://www.w3.org/XML/2000/10/xptr-CR-comments.html

Considering the number of comment you provided you actually got your
own issues tracking numbers :-)

[XP86]  MD1 Classes of XPointer Errors 
        which was accepted
[XP87]  MD2: XML Escaping 
        which was accepted
[XP88]  MD3: Forms of XPointer 
        which was rejected
[XP89]  MD4: Definition of Point Location 
        which was accepted
[XP90]  MD5: Definition of Point Location 
        which was accepted
[XP91]  MD6: Definition of Range Location 
        which was acknoledged, the answer actaully is provided by XPath
[XP92]  MD7: Definition of Range Location II 
        which was accepted
[XP93]  MD8: Covering Ranges for All Location Types 
        which was accepted
[XP94]  MD9: Covering Ranges for All Location Types II 
        which was accepted
[XP95]  MD10: range-to Function 
        which was rejected
[XP96]  MD11: string-range() Function 
        which was accepted
[XP97]  MD12: string-range() Function II 
        which was accepted
[XP98]  MD13: string-range() Function III 
        which was accepted
[XP99]  MD14: Additional Range-Related Functions 
        which was accepted
[XP100] MD15: Additional Range-Related Functions II 
        we acknoledged the problem, but rejected your proposal, selecting
        another alternative
[XP101] MD16: here Function 
        which was accepted

As you can see we accepted a majority of your comments and suggestions,
however there is 3 cases were the Working Group didn't followed your
suggestion.
Could you indicate if you accept the Working Group decisions on those issues ?

  thanks in advance,

Daniel

-- 
Daniel.Veillard@w3.org | W3C, INRIA Rhone-Alpes  | libxml Gnome XML toolkit
Tel : +33 476 615 257  | 655, avenue de l'Europe | http://xmlsoft.org/
Fax : +33 476 615 207  | 38330 Montbonnot FRANCE | Rpmfind search site
 http://www.w3.org/People/all#veillard%40w3.org  | http://rpmfind.net/
Received on Monday, 11 December 2000 12:59:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:41 GMT