- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:57:58 -0600
- To: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Cc: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 13:13, Jonathan Marsh wrote: > Perhaps my second draft is better? Hmm... yes, better. If I could remember exactly the picture I had in my head when discussing this with other TAG members in Japan, I might suggest something a bit different, but I can't just now. So unless/until I get inspired, this will do nicely. > <note> > <p>A key feature of XInclude is that it allows a resource to be > cast to a user-specifed type for inclusion (XML or text). The returned > media type is therefore essentially ignored for the purposes of > inclusion processing, and the syntax of the fragment identifier of the > returned media type will generally not be applicable to the > user-specified type. For <att>parse="xml"</att> inclusions, > sub-resources are identified by a separate <att>xpointer</att> > attribute, which is applied after the casting takes place. While this > does not prevent subresources of XML documents to be identified by URI > (See <loc > href="http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#identification">Architecture of the > World Wide Web [Identification]</loc>), it does limit the use of these > identifiers directly within XInclude.</p> > </note> > > When I describe the problem that way, there is an improvement we could > make. We could say that if the returned media type is actually > application/xml or text/xml, the fragment syntax is interpreted as an > xpointer, and a separate xpointer attribute is not necessary. Resources > returned with other media types rely on the xpointer attribute. Hmm... I dunno if I like that idea or not. I leave it to you guys to noodle on that further. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dan Connolly [mailto:connolly@w3.org] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 10:35 AM > > To: Jonathan Marsh > > Cc: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org; Ian Jacobs > > Subject: RE: xinclude fails to use URI syntax for referring to > resources? > > > > On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 12:23, Jonathan Marsh wrote: > > > The Core WG decided to add some explanation about why the split was > > > made. > > > > Good... > > > > > Here is my first draft of this text (suggestions welcome): > > > > > > <note> > > > <p>For interoperability, fragment identifiers <termref > > > def="dt-must">should not</termref> be used; the interpretation and > > > application of media-specific fragment identifiers in creating > > > info-items is not guaranteed to be supported across implementations. > > > For <att>parse="xml"</att> inclusions, sub-resources are identified > by a > > > separate <att>xpointer</att> attribute instead of by a fragment > > > identifier. A separate attribute is necessary because a fragment > > > identifier is interpreted according to the media type of the > returned > > > resource, while the <att>xpointer</att> attribute is applied after > the > > > resource has been cast to application/xml.</p> > > > </note> > > > > Hmm... no pointer to nor excerpt from > > http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#identification. > > > > Can I please have one? Perhaps I'll find time to craft a > > specfici textual selection presently. > > > > > > > Sorry for the delay in responding > > > > Understandable; no harm done. > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 17:16, Dan Connolly wrote: > > > > > Regarding... > > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xinclude-20031110/ > > > > > > After discussion with the TAG > > > > http://www.w3.org/2003/11/15-tag-summary.html#xincl > > > > I've changed my mind... > > > > > > > "A URI SHOULD be assigned to each resource that is intended to > be > > > > > identified, shared, or described by reference." > > > > > > > > > > -- http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#identification > > > > > > > > > > If a URI has been assigned to a resource, Web agents SHOULD > refer to > > > the > > > > > resource using the same URI, character for character. > > > > > -- http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#identifiers-comparison > > > > > > > > > > which is basically: to refer from one thing to > > > > > another in the Web, use URI reference syntax. > > > > > > > -- > > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ > > > > -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2004 17:58:01 UTC