- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:10:46 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5744 --- Comment #22 from Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> 2008-06-15 08:10:46 --- (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #8) > > In any case, this really is out of scope for HTML5. You could create something > > like XPointer totally independently of HTML, we don't need to specify it in > > HTML5. > > Defining fragment identifiers for text/html totally is in scope. Even if > XPointer was done and good and everybody loved it, HTML5 still would need to > define how it applies to the text/html serialization. OK, so... - fragment identifier syntax depend on media formats - RFC 2854 currently defines fragment identifiers for text/html, based on the HTML 4.01 spec - RFC 3236 currently defines fragment identifiers for application/xhtml+xml, based on RFC 3023 (XML media types) - There's also NOTE-xhtml-media-types-20020801 which probably should be updated when HTML5 is ready - it would be undesirable to have fragment identifiers becoming incompatible between text/html and application/xhtml+xml, so if something is changed, it probably would have to update *both* RFC 2854 and RFC 3236. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 15 June 2008 08:11:21 UTC