W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org > January 2003


From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 16:38:28 -0800
Message-ID: <330564469BFEC046B84E591EB3D4D59C08D1D4BE@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>, <www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org>

An update: We have updated the text and references to be more current
(matching the wording about IRIs in the Namespaces 1.1 draft -
http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/#IRIs).  We have also referred this to
the TAG (http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#IRIEverywhere-27) and we hope
to get more info before resolving it.  If however you feel that we've
addressed this adequately already let us know (we will not assume this).

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@metalab.unc.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 7:49 AM
> To: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org
> Subject: IURIs
> After further research it appears that there is a more current,
> non-expired draft of IURIs available
> http://www.w3.org/International/2002/draft-duerst-iri-01.txt. The
> XInclude spec should be updated to reference this. In particular, it
> does seem true that these are now called IRIs instead of IURIs.
> However, the fundamental point remains that XInclude needs to wait for
> this work to be finished before it can itself be finished. In fact, I
> think even a candidate recommendation is a bit of a stretch when such
> fundamental underpinning is not complete.
> At such time as IRIs are finished, the XInclude spec should
> reference the IRI spec, rather than non-normatively.
> --
> Elliotte Harold
Received on Thursday, 9 January 2003 19:39:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:56 UTC