- From: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@taxonomystrategies.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 11:17:24 -0700
- To: <dvunkannon@kpmg.com>
- Cc: <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>
Thank you for your comments on the xmlns() scheme Last Call draft. The XML Linking Working Group has collected all the comments on the documents and decided what changes to make to the draft. The dispositions of your comments are given below. Please reply to www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org within one week if you wish to make a formal objection to these decisions. Comment: [paraphrase] Would like XPointers to use the in-scope namespace bindings, rather than requiring explicit xmlns() pointer parts. Also asks how to use the scheme to specify the default namespace. Response: XPointers identify portions of XML documents, but they may appear in documents of many different formats. For example, a PDF document might have a link to part of an XML document. Therefore, we can't always rely on there being namespace bindings in-scope. Even when the XPointer does appear in an XML document, it complicates the job of cutting and pasting URLs if software must handle the insertion of xmlns parts when there are namespace bindings in scope. While we sympathize with the desire to keep linkbases compact and use the in-scope bindings, an earlier version of the specification which did use the in-scope bindings was returned to the group because of the considerations just mentioned. A workaround for the linkbase size issue is to declare an entity which contains the xmlns() scheme pointer parts (as well as any other constant parts of the XPointer). As for specifying the default namespace - just as in XPath, you need to bind the namespace URI to some prefix, then use that prefix in the XPointer. Regards, Ron Daniel Jr. Acting chair, XML Linking Working Group Principal, Taxonomy Strategies Tel: +1 925 368 8371 rdaniel@taxonomystrategies.com
Received on Monday, 14 October 2002 14:17:33 UTC