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

Re: XPointer and XML Schema

• To: ht@c..., xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XPointer and XML Schema
• From: "Wayne Steele" <xmlmaster@h...>
• Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 15:49:02 -0700
• Bcc:

Yes, yes, locality is good. Normally, I don't care what some server thinks, 
I worry about what my processes and users think about the data.

But isn't XPointer a different case?
My understanding of XPointer's mission is "to define the fragment 
identifiers for the text/xml mime-type".

If we want to preserve the universality of URLs, there should be a 
consistent meaning for the fragment identifiers. Giving them a different 
meaning based on what XML Schema is used reminds me of the earlier proposal 
that namespace/prefix bindings depended on the context of the reference. I 
think this idea should be rejected for the same reasons.

Yes, I know how it works with DTDs. But users of documents processes them 
using the DTD specified by (or even internal to) the instance. They don't 
load up a random DTD of their choice and use it instead - if they do they 
expect certain things to break, such as fragment identifiers.

-Wayne Steele


>We could do that, but it would be wrong (in my view).  Wrong because
>it violates locality -- a barename link with name XYZZY is to what the
>_target_ establishes as is its XYZZY ID, not the source.  Think of how
>it works with DTDs, and a complex case with external entities and
>catalogues and proxies and . . .  There's nothing I can do at the
>source end to determine what the target is going to establish as the
>referent under those circumstances.  So I don't think there should be
>for the Schema case either.  The _user_ does that by setting up the
>processing environment, in either case.
>
>ht


_________________________________________________________________
Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XPointer and XML Schema
    • From: heikki@n... (Heikki Toivonen)

• Prev by Date: RE: Quick Xpath
• Next by Date: RE: Quick Xpath
• Previous by thread: Re: XPointer architecture (Re: XPointer and XMLSchema)
• Next by thread: Re: XPointer and XML Schema
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread