- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 21:08:02 +0200
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- CC: Silvia Pfieffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>
On 23/06/2014 19:09 , David Singer wrote: > On Jun 23, 2014, at 10:06 , Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> > wrote: >> David Singer writes: >>> Since we want permanent labels, I fear that tying them to a >>> version of the spec and its anchors and/or sections, and >>> location, might be fragile. And, as Robin points out, we don’t >>> need choice. >> >> The whole point of W3C's usage of undated URIs is so that the >> location _doesn't_ change. As long as there is a W3C, >> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/#attr-trace-kind-subtitles will >> resolve. That's as good a promise as you're going to get >> (persistence as commonly understood is a service-level guarantee, >> _not_ a property of names!). > > and when HTML5 moves to HTML6 or 7? Is the name really specific to > this version of HTML? That's why I suggested using /html/ instead of /html5/ if you want something that updates with versions. If you want something that's guaranteed to be absolutely stable forever, use the dated version as Henry suggests (or a namespace document). > what if some editor decides to change the name of the anchor > (consistently in the document), so now it’s > > http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/#attribute-trace-kind-subtitles > > is there really a guarantee of stability for anchor names? That's undocumented, so if you need it to resolve (I thought you just needed names) then you shouldn't rely on it — we've broken these several times before. In practice we probably won't break this for /html5/; we will almost certainly break them in some future version. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Monday, 23 June 2014 19:08:15 UTC