Re: [URN] URI documents -- "# fragment"

Al Gilman (asgilman@access.digex.net)
Mon, 26 Jan 1998 17:25:51 -0500 (EST)


From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
Message-Id: <199801262225.RAA20881@access5.digex.net>
To: jcma@ai.mit.edu (John C. Mallery)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 17:25:51 -0500 (EST)
Cc: uri@Bunyip.Com, urn-ietf@Bunyip.Com
In-Reply-To: <v0313030eb0f292e3264b@[153.36.117.205]> from "John C. Mallery" at "Jan 26, 98 02:30:25 pm"
Subject: Re: [URN] URI documents -- "# fragment"

to follow up on what John C. Mallery said:

> Might be worth noting that #fragment is utterly bogus.  It is a
> positional identifier and cannot be recycled for server-side
> fragments because it has been consumed by legacy web
> applications.

I can't grok your claim.  The way I interpret current practice
the 'fragment' is not positional at all but reference to a name
in a namespace.  So the client positions the cursor at the start
of the named item which is a text range in this kind of document.
But the URL usage is namewise, not positionwise.

Can you elaborate?

Al Gilman