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

Re: XPointer architecture (Re: XPointer and XML Sche

• To: "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@d...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: XPointer architecture (Re: XPointer and XML Schema)
• From: "Jeff Greif" <jgreif@a...>
• Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 14:11:06 -0700
• References: <f5bit3e8gsj.fsf@c...><f5badoq8gg0.fsf@c...><009101c22e1b$ca26a480$4bc8a8c0@A...><1026996266.23053.81.camel@ibook> <020501c22ed0$8d4a5790$4bc8a8c0@A...> <1027070291.24801.31.camel@ibook>

Server-side XPointer processing would be extremely useful also; analogous at
a higher level to the range specifiable in HTTP.  It would be a nuisance to
have to retrieve a 50MB XML document across the Web to a client in order
that the client would extract 100 bytes using XPointer.  When server-side
XPointer is used to extract the fragment, the client must be able to specify
something equivalent to a fragment ID or XPath or XPointer string, the
latter when a range is desired and cannot be specified by a single XPath.

Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@d...>
To: <xml-dev@l...>
Cc: <www-xml-linking-comments@w...>
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 2:18 AM
Subject:  XPointer architecture (Re:  XPointer and XML
Schema)


> On Fri, 2002-07-19 at 05:01, Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> > From: "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@d...>
>
> > > In other words, a client never sends a request for a fragment!
> >
> > But that is not what I am talking about.  HTTP is nothing to do with it.
>
> Yes and no, the architecture in which HTTP based XPointer is used is 3+
> tiers and I have focussed up to now in the interactions between the user
> agent and the server only.
>
> Let's summarize and extend what I have learned so far...
>
> The architectures in which HTTP based XPointer are being used are (at
> least) 3 tiers and the different actors are:
>
> - A user (human or not)
> - A user agent (for instance a browser or an API)
> - A HTTP server
>
> XPointer concatenate in a single string 2 information pieces:
>
> - the identification of the target document
> - the identification of the fragment
>
> XPointer and HTTP make it clear that the identification of the target
> document is an information to be used between the user agent and the
> server and that the identification of the fragment is for the use of the
> user agent only which must process the "fragmentation" of the document
> by itself.
>
> This is a first point where we may agree or not, but I am afraid that
> the couple "XPointer, HTTP" doesn't leave much latitude about the split
> of the tasks between these 3 tiers.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XPointer architecture (Re: XPointer and XMLSchema)
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• References:
  • Re: XPointer and XML Schema
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
  • Re: XPointer and XML Schema
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
  • Re: XPointer and XML Schema
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
  • Re: XPointer and XML Schema
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
  • XPointer architecture (Re: XPointer and XML Schema)
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: URIs harmful (?!)
• Next by Date: RE: URIs harmful (?!)
• Previous by thread: Re: XPointer architecture (Re: XPointer and XMLSchema)
• Next by thread: Re: XPointer architecture (Re: XPointer and XMLSchema)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread