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

Re: Last call comments XPointer Framework/xmlns()/element()

From: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@taxonomystrategies.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:26:16 -0700
To: <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Cc: <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000001c25e77$b6890f30$db0aa8c0@COWBELL>

Hi Steven,

FYI, I'm currently the acting chair of the Linking WG.

This message is a formal response to your comments of
31 July, 2002 on the three last call drafts for Xpointer.
Please let us know if you agree with our closure of the
issues, or if you wish them to remain open.


> Is it a requirement that an XPointer identify a
> subresource? (Which is suggested by 3.3)

The group discussed this in last week's teleconf. The
decision was that no, there were no particular grounds
for us to restrict the kinds of things an XPointer could
locate. In other words, as long as the proposed frames()
scheme (and other schemes in the future) meet the requirements
on URIs, we are not going to rule it as being illegal
simply because it was not something we had foreseen.


>3.2 Shorthand pointer
>I realise that this is not exactly your bailiwick, but can't
>you push for the introduction of an xml:id attribute that can
>be used throughout XML that will work equally well for
>validating as non-validating UAs?

The group also discussed this topic in an earlier teleconf.
While you and I could have an informal conversation about this,
as far as the formal work of the Linking WG, we agree this is
not really our bailiwick.
Specifically, none of the recommendation-track documents we are
chartered to deliver are an appropriate vehicle for defining
such an attribute. Given that the group has a short timeline
until our charter expires, I'm pressing it to stick to its
chartered work and not take on other items.

So, the upshot is that the group intends to mark this issue as
closed with no further action needed.

>3.3 scheme-based pointer
>Please give a (non-normative) example or two to help the poor reader!
>
>3.4 Namespace binding context
>This is very hard to understand if you haven't already read the xmlns()
>scheme spec. An example would give relief!
>
>XMLNS
>
>I have a slight aversion to the use of 'foo' and 'bar' in examples, and
>would prefer something more real world. How about using SVG's and
XHTML's
><a> elements:
>
>    <doc xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
>        <svg:a xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg xlink:href="..""
>            <xhtml:a xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
>href="..">This element and its parent are in different
>namespaces</xhtml:a></svg:a>
>    </doc>
>
>(or would this be too painful :-)
>Do as you wish. This isn't a showstopper for me.
>
>ELEMENT
>
>Replace "foo" with "intro".

These issues have been marked as editorial and the editors have been
directed to do their best to satisfy them.


Thanks for commenting on the drafts. Again, we would appreciate an
email to acknowledge if you are satisfied with these decisions or not.

Best regards,

Ron Daniel Jr.
Principal, Taxonomy Strategies
rdaniel@taxonomystrategies.com
+1 925 368 8371

Taxonomy Strategies:
The Business of Organized Information 
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2002 14:26:21 GMT

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