[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XPointer crisis

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XPointer crisis
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 12:26:34 -0500
• In-reply-to: <p05100303b8807575e600@[192.168.155.106]>

2/1/2002 11:59:30 AM, "David G. Durand" <david@d...> 
wrote:


>
>Xpointer seems to be under imminent threat of being gutted.


>If you want Xpointer killed, you can of course relax, because it 
>seems to be dying quickly.

I must admit that I've only heard the other side of the argument, 
i.e. from those who want to "gut" it into something that is more 
easily understandable and implementable in v 1.0.  I haven't followed 
the list closely enough to have an opinion on the question of 
subsetting vs conformance levels.

Could someone please back up a bit and put this into context for non-
specialists? Also, recall that the majority of people here don't have 
access to the W3C mail archives ... Why would a "gutted" XPointer 
spec be worse than no XPointer spec?  And why is there still no 
XPointer Recommendation if the current spec is worth fighting for?

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XPointer crisis
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • XPointer crisis
    • From: "David G. Durand" <david@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XPointer crisis
• Next by Date: Re: XPointer crisis
• Previous by thread: Re: Press Releases
• Next by thread: Re: XPointer crisis
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread