- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 10:39:27 -0400
- To: daniel@veillard.com
- Cc: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org
At 2:24 PM +0200 6/4/04, Daniel Veillard wrote: > So any error from an XPointer level is opaque, you can't make assumption >at the specification level wether this is due to syntactic problems, scheme >support or error locating any subresource (that's far from perfect, I agree). > What the note you copied intend is to insist on that point, i.e. all errors >coming back from an XPointer evaluation are handled as resource error, because >there is no way to tell what happened in general. Maybe that could be reworded >to be made clearer, I'm fine with that resolution, provided it is reworded. I suggest just saying "error" rather than specifying "syntax error." I don't think the XPointer Framework spec uses the phrase "syntax error". -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
Received on Saturday, 5 June 2004 05:43:37 UTC