- From: Eve Maler - Sun Microsystems <Eve.Maler@East.Sun.COM>
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:27:46 -0500
- To: "Matthew Wilson" <matthew@mjwilson.demon.co.uk>
- Cc: <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>
"Matthew Wilson" <matthew@mjwilson.demon.co.uk> wrote: >I just feel it is important that XPointer 1.0 be compatible with XHTML >(even if that means adding schemes to it) - after all it is perfectly >capable of addressing parts of XHTML documents. Sure, this is a reasonable expectation. There are two things that would make this more likely: - XHTML being served as */xml (Not under our control.) - XHTML defining its own MIME type and a fragment identifier language that subsumes XPointer (Also not under our control, though this week we've been discussing how best to make it attractive for other XML-based media types to base their fragment IDs on XPointer... I believe XHTML is defining its own MIME type, so there's an opportunity here.) Eve
Received on Friday, 10 November 2000 09:26:40 UTC