- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:39:00 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5744 --- Comment #39 from Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org> 2008-06-21 21:38:59 --- (In reply to comment #38) > (In reply to comment #36) > > (In reply to comment #33) > > > ... > > > there is no other spec for fragment identifiers. there is the old html4 spec, > > 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). > > OK, then that's something actionable. Julian, can you please raise in issue in > the group Tracker for this? To be precise, what I meant to ask was, could you please raise an issue in the group tracker stating, "Need to update RFC 2954, RFC 3236, and NOTE-xhtml-media-types-20020801 when HTML5 is ready". -- 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 21:39:33 UTC