- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:48:59 -0800
- To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Web architecture doesn't stipulate absolute URIs. I would like to allow frag ids, specifically so that parts could actually be fragments within an xml document. One example would be a soap with attachments package that contains 2 xml documents, and the first refers to a part that is within the 2nd xml document. I expect that in most cases, people would use absolute URIs, but I can think of scenarios where they would want a fragment. Let's make this a bit more concrete. I want to chunk a large xml document. Say I decide to split this into 2 documents. I could use an xinclude in the first to refer to the 2nd, and I have an application that reads the first chunk, then afterwards resolves the xinclude. As XML requires a root note, the XInclude has to point to a fragment in the 2nd document, specifically all the children of the root node. Now if a new version of XML allowed xml to not have a root node, like external entities, this might be solved. :-) I absolutely agree with carrying the media type. Violently in fact. These documents, and parts, must be correctly self-describing. Now that's web architecture! Cheers, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 2:13 PM > To: David Orchard > Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org > Subject: RE: AFTF requirements list with comments, > pre-2003/01/28 telcon > (revised) > > > I stand corrected. You're right of course. Still, I would > think that we > want to follow web architecture. As far as I know, that > means that the > resource which is a part should be identified by an absolute URI (not > relative, NO fragment ID.) References to the part as a whole > should allow > relative and absolute forms. References within parts that have known > media type should allow URI References, including fragment ID. > > Bottom line: a part is named by an absolute URI. References > are in the > form of URI references, but Fragid is a reference within the part. > Specifically, two references that differ only in their fragid > must resolve > to the same part. > > Also: on the phone call I suggested a requirement that the > attachment > implementation be capable of carrying a media type for each part. > > David: does this sound right? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 > IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com> > 01/30/2003 05:02 PM > > > To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com> > cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org> > Subject: RE: AFTF requirements list with > comments, pre-2003/01/28 telcon (revised) > > > ../a has nothing to do with URI References vs URIs. ../a is > allowed by > URIs > and by URI references. You might be thinking of absolute > URIs however :-) > > URI References are URIs that may have fragments. Oh darn, we > don't have a > term for a URI that has an absolutized portion that may have > fragments. > > Cheers, > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org > > [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On > > Behalf Of noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com > > Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 1:43 PM > > To: David Orchard > > Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org > > Subject: RE: AFTF requirements list with comments, > > pre-2003/01/28 telcon > > (revised) > > > > > > > > David Orchard suggests: > > > > >> DR6. The specification must permit parts to be identified > > by URIs or URI > > References. This is similar to ChrisF's comment. > > > > I am a little surprised. I would have thought that what we want is: > > > > * The identity of each part is a URI (I.e. an absolute URI)( > > > > * References to parts are in the form of URI references (which are > > resolved through the usual mechanisms to yield the absolute URI). > > > > David: are you really saying that you want to allow "../a" as the > > identity of a part? Thanks. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 > > IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 > > One Rogers Street > > Cambridge, MA 02142 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 30 January 2003 17:50:50 UTC