Re: W3C URN scheme 'root' doesn't exist?

Just register a bug on the HTML spec - the editors should triage it.
Silvia.

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Bob Lund <B.Lund@cablelabs.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 6/23/14, 5:11 PM, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>On Jun 23, 2014, at 16:10 , Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> We would need to be consistent for all constants defined in the spec in
>>>defining such a referencing scheme. Also, it has no impact on the
>>>normative implementations of UAs. I would therefore suggest to add a
>>>sentence like this to an introductory section with an explanation of how
>>>to find the URLs for all defined constants, maybe with a kind value add
>>>an example.
>>
>>works for me!
>
> It looks like this didn't make it into the recent HTML Recommendation.
> Should a bug be submitted against HTML WG or HTML.next?
>
>>
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Silvia.
>>>
>>> On 24 Jun 2014 07:21, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>>> I would actually prefer that Œthe w3c¹ simply decide, I think.  Ideally
>>>there is a sentence somewhere saying roughly
>>>
>>> ³The URI to identify an HTML[5] track Œkind¹ value, when used in other
>>>contexts, is http://Š²
>>>
>>> As I say, DASH uses a Scheme (think, namespace) + Value pair.
>>>
>>> On Jun 23, 2014, at 12:08 , Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > 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 don¹t
>>> >>>> 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 it¹s
>>> >>
>>> >> 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
>>>
>>> David Singer
>>> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>>>
>>
>>David Singer
>>Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>>..
>>
>

Received on Wednesday, 19 November 2014 00:45:15 UTC