W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-fragment-comments@w3.org > April 2001

Re: Comments for CR-xml-fragment-20010212

From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 08:51:10 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>, www-xml-fragment-comments@w3.org

Thank you for your comments which, as always, are quite helpful.
I expect they will all be incorporated into the next draft.



At 18:15 2001 04 18 -0700, Susan Lesch wrote:
>These are just a few comments on your XML Fragment Interchange
>Candidate Recommendation [1]. It accomplishes so much in so little
>space it is a pleasure to read.
>You might consider cutting the change notes when and if you go to
>Recommendation, to simplify even more.
>The URIs for previous versions would be more readable if they were
>newline-delimited rather than space-delimited.
>Globally, Docbook -> DocBook and aka -> a.k.a.
>ACME.COM is a registered domain. W3C recommends using IANA's
>example.com, example.net, and example.org for examples. Please see RFC
>2606 section 3 at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2606.txt.
>The beginnings of the Abstract and Overview seem to be copied from
>OASIS TR 9601:1996 (http://www.oasis-open.org/html/tr9601.html). I
>didn't look any farther. You might credit them, or reword any text that
>wasn't W3C's originally. It may be that Paul Grosso has some copyright
>in OASIS's TR; I don't know.
>In the Overview par. 3, the long section in parentheses about
>send/receive could be cut, as these terms are defined in section 3
>using exactly the same words.
>Same with these two sentences that appear more or less identically in
>both sections 1 and 2. I would cut one set.
>    The goal of this activity is to define a way to enable processing
>    of small parts of an XML document without having to process
>    everything up to the part in question. This can be done
>    regardless of whether the parts are entities or not, and the
>    parts can either be viewed immediately or accumulated for later
>    use, assembly, or other processing.
>The abbreviation fcs is defined in section 3 in lowercase. Twice in 5.1
>and sometimes in section 5.2 it is capitalized FCS. Could you choose
>one or the other? (Lowercase with or without <code> markup is fine.)
>Below, a section and paragraph number is followed by a quote and then
>a suggestion.
>1. par. 3
>is call the fragment entity
>is called the fragment entity
>2. last par. is one really long sentence. Could break at the semicolon.
>3. par. 1
>for the purposed of
>for the purposes of
>5.1 par. after second Note
>comes from Fragment Interchange namespace
>comes from the Fragment Interchange namespace
>5.1 last par. and 5.4 par. 2
>arabic numbers
>Arabic numerals
>web server (twice)
>Web server
>5.1 second example
>5.2 first constraint
>Fragment Interchange Namespace URI
>Fragment Interchange namespace URI
>5.2 definition
>fragment Interchange namespace
>Fragment Interchange namespace
>5.4 par. 2
>web server
>Web server
>5.4.1 last par.
>for the purposes of completeness of this example
>for the purpose of completeness in this example
>In A.2. MIME and RFC 2387, is there a reason for linking to imc.org
>rather than to ietf.org or rfc-editor.org?
>C.2 external entity
>Base 64
>[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/CR-xml-fragment-20010212
>Best wishes for your project,
>Susan Lesch - mailto:lesch@w3.org  tel:+1.858.483.4819
>World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) - http://www.w3.org/
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2001 10:42:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:07:54 UTC