- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 04:52:15 +0200
- To: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson)
- Cc: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
On Thursday, October 23, 2003, 6:53:45 PM, Henry wrote: HST> "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org> writes: >> [Ian] >> DO: I'm not sure that we would recommend xpointer to wsdl wg >> even if we said parens ok. Do we want a finding on good URI >> practices? >> CL, TB: Yes. >> [TB seeks title for issue regarding URI design] >> >> [ChrisL] >> [21]http://www.w3.org/XML/Linking has no link to an >> implementation report >> >> [21] http://www.w3.org/XML/Linking HST> I will respond at greater length in due course on the vexed question HST> of balanced parentheses in URIs, but the above comment needs to be HST> rebutted more quickly, if it is intended to be an assertion that HST> XPointer is unimplemented, hence a bad precedent. It is not intended to be such an assertion. Indeed, I am aware of several implementations and IIRC I read about them in an implementation report (and on the xml-linking list, too). But, in the course of the TAG discussions, I went looking for it and could not find it. I wanted to check on specific details. In a running discussion, if you can't find the info and quickly, then you can't use it in the argument. I was troubled by Roy's assertion that parens in fragids were illegal and contrary to the BNF for a URI. This was being discussed in the context of WSDL fragids; I pointed out that if the TAG as a whole took the position that these were architecturally broken, then we were saying that the following W3C Recs were broken: http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-framework/ http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-element/ http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xmlns/ http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xpointer/ http://www.w3.org/TR/smil20/ http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/ In other words, I wanted us to be very sure before making such an assertion. HST> It does, however, include a pointer to an implementation report [1], HST> which Chris must have just missed, Yes, I did. Thanks for pointing it out. HST> a few lines down from the top, with the words "Check the HST> Implementation Chart." It cites a substantial number of HST> implementations. HST> (Note that the XML Linking WG was wound up 8 months ago, and that page HST> is not being maintained.) HST> The decision to go to PR and REC with XPointer was supported by a HST> contextualised version of the XPointer part of that report [2]. Thanks for the pointers, Henry. Please rest assured that I was not making a process point about the activities of the XML Linking WG. HST> [1] http://www.w3.org/XML/2000/09/LinkingImplementations.html HST> [2] http://www.w3.org/XML/2002/10/LinkingImplementations.html -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2003 22:52:41 UTC