- 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