Lists Home |
Date Index |
David G. Durand wrote:
> Xpointer seems to be under imminent threat of being gutted. There
> appears to be a significant chance that there will be no XPointer at
> all, or only a drastically cut down one. Particularly endangered are the
> ability to have ranges of any kind, or any forms of addressing other
> than "bare names" or maybe child sequence locations.
This is overdramatized. The question at hand is whether a more minimal
form of conformance should be permitted, so that people who want to
implement streaming XPointers don't have to handle full XPath syntax.
I know we have a lot of "streamers" around: the question is, do we
need to do XPath in XML fragment identifiers and XLinks in order
to declare victory?
I think the minimal set for victory is: bare names, child sequences
(like /1/2/3 or tag/4/5/6, walking the element tree), the latter
two with character-data counts, and ranges consisting of two of
any of these. This allows you to do practical
pointing and transclusion (nobody points to an attribute, or a
namespace node, or a comment). Check out the following:
> I would urge anyone in the XML community who is interested in Xpointer's
> final approval with its current feature set to write immediately to the
> W3C comment list for Xpointer and Xlink:
Yes, please do.
> Because this is a low-profile list, you may also want to comment to
> individuals within the W3C as well. I refer you to the web site for any
> addresses you may need.
Be advised that the W3C Linking WG page is seriously out of date.
> If you read the archives, you may also be puzzled that the word within
> the W3c seems to be that XPointer is dead, given the very small number
> of negative comments submitted. [There's no denying that the one I found
> in quick scan of the archives for the last 4 months was very negative].
> However, such issues are irrelevant at this point.
XPointer is in CR state, meaning that feedback from implementers is
desired. This has been lacking.
John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith. --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_