- From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 14:05:06 -0600
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
At 20:27 2003 10 29 +0100, Chris Lilley wrote: >On Wednesday, October 29, 2003, 5:24:57 PM, MURATA wrote: >MM> 3) Fragment identifier > >MM> At present, RFC 3023 says: > >MM> As of today, no established specifications define identifiers >MM> for XML media types. However, a working draft published by >MM> W3C, namely "XML Pointer Language (XPointer)", attempts to >MM> define fragment identifiers for text/xml and >MM> application/xml. The current specification for XPointer is >MM> available at http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr. > >MM> We have XPointer recommendations but are not ready to bless >MM> XPointer. We should say so. > >Perhaps the framework and scheme should be pointed to? That is what the XLink WG recommended [1] and what the XML Core WG more recently [2] recommends. paul [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-fragid/ [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-core-wg/2003OctDec/0052 to wit: DECISION: The XML Core WG would like to urge for a revision of 3023 that deprecates text/xml and that defines the fragment identifier to be what the XLink WG Note suggests: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-fragid/
Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:05:21 UTC