RE: XInclude WD 11/10/2003 comments

Thanks for your comments, responses inline:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-xml-xinclude-comments-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-xml-xinclude-
> comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Oleg Tkachenko
> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 10:42 AM
> To: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org
> Subject: XInclude WD 11/10/2003 comments
> 
> 
> Hello!
> 
> Here are some comments on new XInclude WD:
> 
> 1. "3 Syntax" section states
> "Implementations should recognize and provide a diagnostic for include
> elements in the old namespace http:www.w3.org/2001/XInclude."
> It's not clear to me what "provide a diagnostic" requirement stands
for
> exactly and what "include elements" are - only xi:include or both
> xi:include and xi:fallback?

Agreed: "Implementations should recognize elements in the old namespace
http:www.w3.org/2001/XInclude and provide a warning (non-fatal error) to
the user when encountering them."

We recognize warnings are not available in all environments, and that
over time the utility of this warning will diminish as the obsolete
namespace falls out of use, which is why this behavior is marked as
"should", not "must".

> 2. There is a typo in the schema definition:
> <xs:attribute name="xpointer" use="optional" ype="xs:string"/>

Fixed, thanks.

> 3. "4.2.1 Document Information Items" section states:
> "An XPointer might identify a document information item (for instance,
> no specified xpointer attribute, or an XPointer specifically locating
> the document root.)"
> It's not clear what "XPointer" term means in this context - if no
> xpointer attribute is specified, why it's called "XPointer"? Sounds
like
> it's about include location + xpointer attr value, aka "target for
> inclusion", which probably should be defined more formally.

Agreed, I've introduced the term "inclusion target" and that seems to
have cleaned it up nicely.

> 4. "4.2.6 Attribute and Namespace Declaration Information Items"
section
> states:
> "An XPointer might identify an attribute node or a namespace node. An
> include location identifying such a node is a fatal error."
> As defined include location is IRI based only on resolved href
attribute
> value so how it could identify attribute or namespace node? Should it
be
> "An XPointer might identify an attribute node or a namespace node. An
> XPointer identifying such a node is a fatal error."?

Agreed, the "inclusion target" term helps here too: "It is a fatal error
for the inclusion target to be an attribute node or a namespace node."

> 5. First paragraph in "4.3 Included Items when parse="text"" mentions
> "syntax error in a fragment identifer" - I believe it's a rudiment
from
> the previous version, otherwise it should be defined how fragment
> identifiers should be treated to be able to implementations to detect
> syntax errors in them.

Agreed, I'll strike that phrase.

> 6. "C.5 Fallback Example" is not well-formed (xi namespace prefix is
not
> defined):
> 
> <?xml version='1.0'?>
> <div>
>    <xi:include href="example.txt" parse="text">
>      <xi:fallback>
>        <xi:include href="fallback-example.txt" parse="text">
>          <xi:fallback><a href="mailto:bob@example.org">Report
> error</a></xi:fallback>
>        </xi:include>
>      </xi:fallback>
>    </xi:include>
> </div>

Fixed.

> --
> Oleg Tkachenko
> http://www.tkachenko.com/blog
> Multiconn Technologies, Israel
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2004 15:06:32 UTC