W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > May 2005

[Bug 1479] 3.11 Embedded Stylesheet Modules; how to express type information

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 19:53:56 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Cc:
Message-Id: <E1DZwWK-0005E0-QL@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1479





------- Additional Comments From colin@colina.demon.co.uk  2005-05-22 19:53 -------
(In reply to comment #1)

> use it in a call to the id() function. I suspect the 1.0 text avoiding
> discussing this because the meaning of a fragment identifier technically depends
> on the media type of the document containing the embedded stylesheet, and as far
> as I know we *still* don't have an official spec that says bare ID values are
> legitimate as fragment identfiers for the application/XML media type.
> 

Well, it's, let us say, open to debate.
The official spec is still RFC 3023, which says: "As of today no established
specifications define identifiers for XML media types."
But then goes on to talk about XPointer, which was not (then) a Recommendation.
("Today" was January 2001)

Now the XPointer framework DOES say bare ID values are legitimate fragment
identifiers, and it's a W3C recommendation.

I thought about this for a long time, before deciding that this DOES legitmise
bare IDs, but as I could see some people might not be 100% convinced by my
reasoning, for my own XSLT processor, I have made it an option (by default, use
of XPointer is assumed legitimate, but if the user feels strongly enough about
it, (s)he can turn it off).

this seemed to be the best practical approach.
Received on Sunday, 22 May 2005 19:54:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:05 UTC