- From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:52:54 +0200
- To: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org
- CC: Paul Grosso <paul@paulgrosso.name>
hello. On 2013-07-29 16:35 , Paul Grosso wrote: > Thank you for your comment on the XML Core WG's Last Call draft of > XML Inclusions (XInclude) Version 1.1 (January 2013) [1] recorded at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-xinclude-comments/2013Feb/0000 > > Please see the latest editor's draft at > http://www.w3.org/XML/2013/07/xinclude-11/ > and/or the diff-marked version at > http://www.w3.org/XML/2013/07/xinclude-11/diff.html > especially the changes to the description of the fragid > attribute in section 3.1 xi:include Element [1]. > > Please reply to www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org indicating your > acceptance of this disposition of your comment or explaining any > remaining concerns you may have. this looks good to me, thanks a lot for addressing my comment. it might be a nice touch to explicitly say that media types are supposed to register fragment identification schemes per http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4288#section-4.11, and that the SHOULD in "implementations should process fragment identifiers per the relevant media type" corresponds to registered schemes that supported media types may have. but i don't think this would add any substance; it would just make it easier to connect the dots for people reading the spec. thanks and cheers, dret. -- erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu - tel:+1-510-2061079 | | UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool) | | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret |
Received on Tuesday, 30 July 2013 08:53:23 UTC