Re: Rough sketch for an I-D (a successor of RFC 3023)

I do not want to continue further technical discussion in this mailing list, 
since I do not want to eliminate people in the IETF-XML-ML from this discussion.
Furthermore, I think that the role of the TAG is to encourage other groups to 
think about architectural principles and that it should not try to make final 
decisions for every minor issue.

However, I still would like to know if the TAG (or W3C in general) is willing 
to propose fragment identifiers as part of the next version of the XML media 
types RFCs.  This may cause a significant delay.  (Note: I would not oppose to 
XPointer as fragment identifiers if scheme names other than "element" are 
*syntactically* disallowed.)

Cheers,

-- 
MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>

Received on Friday, 31 October 2003 07:52:51 UTC