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

Re: more QName madness

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: more QName madness
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 17:06:29 -0500
• In-reply-to: <031401c28db5$63cfe080$7c674544@n...>

jonathan@o... (Jonathan Borden) writes:
>Ultimately the syntax used for fragment identifiers is media type
>dependent, XPointer provides a solution for application/xml (and an
>extension mechanism), so ultimately if you are willing to go to the
>trouble to define your own media type, you can have whatever syntax
>you like. 

That is definitely true.  Developers who register their own media types
have the opportunity to specify whatever fragment identifier syntax they
like, and +xml has no bearing on that except insofar as developers might
find XPointer convenient for their own reuse.  (Section 5 of RFC 3023
only notes that 'a working draft published by W3C, namely "XML Pointer
Language (XPointer)", attempts to define fragment identifiers for
text/xml and application/xml.')

>I am not sure that XPointer *prevents* you for doing that
>but if it does, then *you* (and your coauthors) might change that by
>modifying http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.txt appropriately. Perhaps
>RFC 3023 is due for an updating (concerning the fragment identifier
>syntax and semantics) now that XPointer has made more progress.

We will have to evaluate that update when the XPointer process is
complete.  (There are several other issues, notably the 1.1 drafts of
XML and Namespaces in XML, that may also require consideration.)

Beyond issues surrounding the QName approach, there will likely be a lot
to discuss at the IETF regarding XPointer.  Roy Fielding's recent
comments on www-xml-linking-comments may provide a reasonable summary of
some of the issues XPointer may face in that context:
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2002OctDec
/0039.html>

I also note that "Guidelines for the Use of XML within IETF Protocols"
makes no mention of either fragment identifiers or XPointer, which I
suspect was a wise decision on their part.

<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-ietf-xml-
guidelines-07.txt>

When we do get into that update process, the discussion will likely take
place at ietf-xml-mime@i....  If anyone wants to start reading the
archives now, they're at http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/.

-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether

• References:
  • Re: more QName madness
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RDF and the new releases
• Next by Date: Re: RDF and the new releases
• Previous by thread: Re: more QName madness
• Next by thread: Re: more QName madness
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread