- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 11:08:27 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5744 --- Comment #36 from Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> 2008-06-21 11:08:26 --- (In reply to comment #33) > ... > there is no other spec for fragment identifiers. there is the old html4 spec, > where it is an integral part of the spec. there is xpointer, which is > unfinished and has been designed for xml. other than that, there is nothing > that could be referenced. if it is decided that fragment identifers should be > improved in html5, it must be described in html5. if they should stay as in > html4, this also must be said in html5 (or its media type registration). > ... Actually, there are, both in IETF land (for text/html and application/xhtml+xml), and in W3C land: - 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 (<http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5744#c22>) The question is whether it's in scope for us to update these specs (and yes, I think it is). -- 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 Saturday, 21 June 2008 11:09:01 UTC