[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
On Monday 12 November 2001 04:25 am, David Carlisle wrote:
> probably some others i don't know, but the principle is the same,
> that the syntax after the # depends on the mime type of whatever is
> returned.
Right. That last point is the important one for me... the syntax can be
whatever one wished for the media type.
> > I've ever seen ID attributes used in HTML is in the context of an
> > anchor.
>
> Yes exactly that is the semantics of fragment ids in text/html, that's
> the whole point.
My point here is that the linking is scoped to <a> tags, which disambiguate
the context sufficiently that ID-ness isn't needed, except perhaps for
validation.
> http://www.example.com/aaaa.xml#foo
>
> and what you get sent back is an HTML 2.0 file (because you are using
> Xmosaic 1.0) then #foo will be interpretted as an HTML fragment id and
> mosaic will scroll to the point marked <a name="foo"/>
> If on the other hand you request
>
> http://www.example.com/aaaa.xml#any-xml-specific-fragment-syntax
>
> then you will still get the same HTML file back but you can't make sense
> of the fragment id.
If it's not HTML, who cares?