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

Re: XML Indirection Facility

• To: "Robin Cover" <robin@i...>, "XML-DEV Discussion" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: XML Indirection Facility
• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
• Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 18:54:26 -0400
• Cc: <eliot@i...>
• References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10306121224430.1375-100000@castor>

Robin Cover wrote:


>
> Of potential interest to XML-DEV readers:
>
> XML Indirection Facility
> W. Eliot Kimber, W3C Note
>
> XIndirect is a simple mechanism for using XML to represent indirect
> addresses in order to augment the core functionality of XLink and
> XPointer without requiring either of those specifications to
> themselves require support for indirect addresses.

I note that this introduces a new QName -> URI mapping -- it should be noted
that QNames are attribute content which gives me a slight whince. In any
case:

[[
If there is no fragment identifier, acts as though
       the fragment identifier "#/" had been specified,
       returning the document root.
]]

Should this be "#" -- a 'bare name'? -- in which case I agree that this is
probably the most appropriate QName -> URI mapping. Otherwise is this
intended to be a bare XPath? e.g. http://example.org/foo#/element-name ?

In any case I am not entirely comfortable with having a QName within
attribute content which is intended to represent a URI, particularly until
we can agree on a 'standard' QName -> URI mapping.

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Indirection Facility
    • From: Bill de hÓra <bill@d...>

• References:
  • XML Indirection Facility
    • From: Robin Cover <robin@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Next by Date: RE: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Previous by thread: XML Indirection Facility
• Next by thread: Re: XML Indirection Facility
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread