W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2008

[Bug 5744] Improved Fragment Identifiers

From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 10:11:09 -0700
Message-ID: <4852AA2D.5040809@berkeley.edu>
To: public-html@w3.org

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Bug 5744] Improved Fragment Identifiers
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 06:57:27 +0000
From: bugzilla@farnsworth.w3.org
References: <bug-5744-1720@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>


Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

            What    |Removed                     |Added
              Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
          Resolution|                            |NEEDSINFO

--- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>  2008-06-13 
06:57:26 ---
What problem are we solving here? Is giving a fragment identifier into a
document really something that causes difficulties? Most people seem to deal
fine with just saying "Look at bla on this page" with a URI without a 
identifier, no?

It seems like if this was really a problem, people would have been doing 
to work around it, as they do with many other limitations of the Web 
but in this case I really see nobody working to index into pages better. 
evidence of the need is there?

Even if the problem exists, though, and is worth solving, why is 
XPointer not
good enough? We can easily redefine XPointer to work for HTML as well as 
since HTML5 defines text/html HTML in the same terms as XML-based HTML.

Are user agents willing to actually implement this?

Incidentally, I recommend reading:


Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You reported the bug.

erik wilde   tel:+1-510-6432253 - fax:+1-510-6425814
        dret@berkeley.edu  -  http://dret.net/netdret
        UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool)
Received on Friday, 13 June 2008 17:11:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:34 UTC