- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 12:01:29 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
- Cc: "XMLSigWG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
My comments on the XPtr last call documents follow. These don't reflect an official position of the xenc and xmldsig WGs (I don't think such a formal comment is needed), just my thoughts coming from that perspective. First, I'm very glad to see progress! <smile/> http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-framework/ Is the "barename" word being dropped in favor of "Shorthand Pointer"? It's mentioned in the status, but once that changes, it'll be hard to figure out what's become of barenames. In 3.3 and 3.4, it might be useful to see an example of those scheme's in operation. (There's no reference to those specs from the Framework even.) I like the modularity, but somewhere, it'd still be nice to see an example of the different pieces. http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xpointer/ ... http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xmlns/ For example, in the later part of 3, include the full XPointer parts used to identify x:a . http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-element/ ...
Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2002 07:24:26 UTC