- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 18:42:10 -0500
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, www-tag@w3.org, Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
Well, not really. A general way of saying it is that the fragid is a document-global identifier in whatever language. You invent a new language, and it get s new global identifiers So in a javascript module, for example, I would expect foo.js#bar to be the global variable bar in the file foo. It is really important to be able to ivent new languages, and so it hard to say how theyr global address space will work. In the case of HTML and RDFA, we have a mixture of languages so an localid can either identify an HTML anchor or a RDF concept. I don't like the idea of things being both. Tim On 2010-11 -29, at 18:29, Nathan wrote: > Jonathan Rees wrote: >> Re ACTION-502: Report back on discussions with Ben Adida regarding >> fragid semantics for RDFa >> According to RFC 3986, a "fragment's format and resolution is >> ... dependent on the media type of a potentially retrieved >> representation". > > Would it be possible to have a generic web scale fragment processing rule which applies when a media-type does not specifically provide it's own processing rules, and indeed to which they can defer if the question is ever asked? > > Best, > > Nathan > >
Received on Monday, 29 November 2010 23:42:15 UTC