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

Re: XPointer and XML Schema

• To: "Wayne Steele" <xmlmaster@h...>
• Subject: Re: XPointer and XML Schema
• From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
• Date: 18 Jul 2002 14:13:17 +0100
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <f5bofd55kh4.fsf@c...>
• References: <F123uLPC67huJPSPRKX00002696@h...><f5bofd55kh4.fsf@c...>
• User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Honest Recruiter)

ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson) writes:

> "Wayne Steele" <xmlmaster@h...> writes:
> 
> "Wayne Steele" <xmlmaster@h...> writes:
> 
> > Just found it:
> > 
> > Chapter 4.1 of RFC 2396 says:
> > <quote>
> > ...
> > The semantics of a fragment identifier is a property of the data
> > resulting from a retrieval action, regardless of the type of URI used
> > in the reference. Therefore, the format and interpretation of fragment
> > identifiers is dependent on the media type [RFC2046] of the retrieval
> > result. The character restrictions described in Section 2 for URI also
> > apply to the fragment in a URI-reference. Individual media types may
> > define additional restrictions or structure within the fragment for
> > specifying different types of "partial views" that can be identified
> > within that media type.
> > 
> > 
> > A fragment identifier is only meaningful when a URI reference is
> > intended for retrieval and the result of that retrieval is a document
> > for which the identified fragment is consistently defined.
> > 
> > </quote>
> > 
> > I believe the viewpoint that "the client determines what the fragment
> > identifier really means" is at odds with the definition in RFC 2396.
> 
> Precisely -- the _server_ determines what the fragment identifier
> _really means_.  More in another response to this thread.

Oops -- my bad, misunderstood what you've quoted plus misremembered my
RFCs -- after re-reading RFC 2396 it's clear that in fact the _user
agent_ (read client) is responsible for interpreting the fragId:
  
  "the optional fragment identifier, separated from the URI by a
  crosshatch ("#") character, consists of additional reference
  information _to be interpreted by the user agent_ after the retrieval
  action has been successfully completed.  As such, it is not part of
  a URI, but is often used in conjunction with a URI."

So putting together your quote and mine, the referent of a fragId is
determined by the client based on the mime type of the resource as
returned by the server.

ht
-- 
  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
          W3C Fellow 1999--2002, part-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@c...
		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]

• References:
  • Re: XPointer and XML Schema
    • From: "Wayne Steele" <xmlmaster@h...>
  • Re: XPointer and XML Schema
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• Prev by Date: Re: XPointer and XML Schema
• Next by Date: Re: XPointer and XML Schema
• Previous by thread: Re: XPointer and XML Schema
• Next by thread: Re: XPointer and XML Schema
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread