- From: Paul Grosso <paul@paulgrosso.name>
- Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:56:46 -0600
- To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
On 2015-11-11 11:06, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> I'm looking at doing this myself, by editing Richard's existing
> implementation.
>
> Further to the call just now, am I right in thinking that the most
> important things to do are
>
> 1) Support new 'fragid' attribute
> 2) Support whole-document-as-text inclusion
> 3) Support attribute copying
>
> ?
What I see as 1.1 additions are:
1. fragid attribute in general
1a. support for a fragid value that is a [IETF RFC 5147]
fragment identifier (into text/plain content)
2. attribute copying including use of the local-attributes
namespace
2a. support for set-xml-id
3. treating values of the parse attribute other than xml
and text as a recoverable error.
I'm not sure what whole-document-as-text inclusion is.
We already had parse="text". Perhaps you are suggesting
adding support for fragid but not supporting a fragid
value that is a [IETF RFC 5147] fragment identifier.
I cannot tell from reading the spec whether support
for RFC 5147 is required. It isn't mentioned under
Application Conformance, but the description of fragid,
it says "for text processing, [the fragid value] is
interpreted as a [IETF RFC 5147] fragment identifier"
and it doesn't discuss what to do if an implementation
doesn't support that. I suppose if we don't get two
implementations to support RFC 5147, we would have to
make support for fragid when parse="text" optional.
paul
Received on Wednesday, 11 November 2015 17:57:17 UTC