- From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:55:01 +0200
- To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: www-html-editor@w3.org, "Shane McCarron" <shane@aptest.com>
There is an ED with some text at http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-xhtml-role-20070905/#sec_3.1.1. but there should be a newer one before the end of the week. Steven On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:39:26 +0200, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 15:35 +0200, Steven Pemberton wrote: >> Dan, >> >> Thanks. This is now fixed. > > I'm interested to see how it's fixed. Is there an editor's > draft or something I can look at? > > >> Steven >> >> On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:25:53 +0200, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> >> wrote: >> >> > >> > A comment on >> > http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-role >> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-role-20061113 >> > >> > Please clarify how QNames in the role attribute are mapped to URIs. >> > >> > Maybe it's already there and I'm just reading too fast? In any >> > case, for motivation, the March 2004 TAG finding, which concludes... >> > >> > "Where there is a compelling reason to use QNames instead of URIs for >> > identification, it is imperative that specifications provide a mapping >> > between QNames and URIs, if such a mapping is possible." >> > -- Using Qualified Names (QNames) as Identifiers in XML Content >> > TAG Finding 17 March 2004 >> > http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/qnameids.html >
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 13:55:11 UTC