- From: Matthew Wilson <matthew@mjwilson.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 19:48:41 +0100
- To: jose.kahan@w3.org
- Cc: www-annotation@w3.org
At 16:31 09/05/01 +0200, Jose Kahan wrote: >Hello Matthew, > >On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 07:16:17PM +0100, Matthew Wilson wrote: > > What is the situtation regarding the use of Annotea with documents which > > are HTML, but not XHTML? > > > > XPointer, after all, applies to "resources whose type is one of text/xml, > > application/xml, text/xml-external-parsed-entity, or > > application/xml-external-parsed-entity". > >You got it right. I can tell you that in the Amaya client instance of >Annotea, we allow to make XPointers on HTML documents. As Manos pointed out, >if you do so in a non-valid HTML document, the result may vary from >browser to browser. You can, of course, use XPointer to point to the anchor >or to the ID attribute of HTML documents. However, if your XPointer expression >has some kind of tree inside it, it should only point to one of the above >types of documents. At least, this is the politcally correct, spec. >conformant view. We don't impose such rule in Amaya yet, because we wanted >to experiment a bit more with the possibilities of XPointer. We may need to >change this in the near future, according to the feedback we get from the >XPointer WG. Thanks. Perhaps I should point out the issues I am coming up against: For Annozilla, I try to resolve the XPointer describing the context of the annotation, and I intend to try and construct XPointers when creating annotations. Currently I concentrate on things like xpointer(/html[1]/body[1]/p[3]). This works quite well, but I can only do this by navigating the DOM. But this has its difficulties: the HTML DOM says that tag names should be canonicalised to upper case, and also (I think) that "implied" HTML elements are exposed by the DOM - so you could end up creating references to elements that are not really present in the document. Matthew Wilson
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2001 14:49:43 UTC