W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2010

XML fragment identifier interpretation

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:06:18 +0100
To: ietf-xml-mime@imc.org
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org, public-xml-core-wg@w3.org, www-tag@w3.org, Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <f5bocf08qzp.fsf@calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk>
Hash: SHA1

Consider the following URI:


In Firefox 3.6pre, IE8, Chrome 5 and Opera 10, it just works.

But there is _no_ justification for this, in 3023 or 3023bis.  Why?
Because there is no ID with value 'element-key' in the XML document
identified by the above URI.  It exists _only_ in the output of the
XSLT stylesheet named in an xml-stylesheet processing instruction
which appears therein.

Or so it seems to me.

I think we need to add this to the use cases on the table as we
consider the TAG's request [1] to think again about generic processing
and frag-ids.  I'm tempted to say that we need to find a way to allow
application-specific frag-id semantics to co-exist with generic

One subsidiary question -- is this or is this not a "same-document
reference" [2]?  Or, to put it another way, where if anywhere do we
find a definitive answer to the question of what the base URI is of
the _output_ of an XSLT stylesheet applied in these circumstances?


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jun/0125.html
[2] http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.html#sec-4.4
- -- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

Received on Thursday, 24 June 2010 14:07:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:34 UTC