W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > July to September 2002

Re: XPointer: definition of equal points

From: Ronald Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 07:43:25 -0700
Message-ID: <E7244F2AFCE1C644BD0B1CCE65C84B24891C13@xchanger3.interwoven.com>
To: "'jeni@jenitennison.com'" <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Cc: "'www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>

Hi,

On Apr. 13 you asked about the definition of equal points in the
XPointer draft. Very sorry for the tardiness of this reply.

The XML Linking WG has just released a new version of the XPointer
specification. It factors the original XPointer document into
separate documents for:
  schemes framework
     http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-framework/
  xmlns scheme
     http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xmlns/
  basic element addressing scheme
     http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-element/
  full xpointer scheme
     http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xpointer/

All the drafts are last-call WDs, except for the xpointer()
scheme. It is a working draft, and the issue of equality of
points is the main technical issue we will be addressing before
advancing it to last call.

I can't guarantee what solution we will come up with, but the
current leading candidate is the 'recursive definition' given in
Michael Dyck's comments on the XPointer spec:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2002JanMar/0030
.html

If you have the time and inclination, we would be interested
in your opinion of that approach.

Thanks for your careful examination of the CR draft, I hope
you will be able to review the new documents as carefully.

Best regards,
Ron Daniel Jr.
acting chair, XML Linking WG
Received on Thursday, 11 July 2002 10:44:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:44 GMT