Re: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting

Paul Grosso wrote:

> So I'm wondering if the text or the link is wrong.  As written,
> it looks like TB is saying fragmentInXML-28 and xmlIDSemantics-32
> are related, but I'm guessing the text is wrong and he means to
> be saying that xmlProfiles-29 and xmlIDSemantics-32 are related
> (to which I disagree, but I'm more interested in getting the minutes
> accurate at this point).

What I was saying is that people who are interested in solving the ID 
problem often are motivated by the idea that they're also solving the 
fragment-identifier problem, i.e. what does foo#bar mean when foo is 
served as */xml or */*+xml.

I'm not 100% convinced that the issues are the same issue, but they're 
probably not orthogonal and it would be silly to focus on the ID problem 
without thinking about the frag-id issues. -Tim

Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2003 12:27:02 UTC