[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
John Cowan wrote:
> Simon St.Laurent scripsit:
>
> > Earlier drafts of XLink and XPointer had some interesting forms
> > which suggested sending the Fragment Identifier to the server as a
> > query so that the browser would just get the parts they needed.
>
> That idea didn't fit the URI reference architecture.
Architecture matters? Geez. Someone should have told the Web Services
people that a long time ago. [1]
> It could be done
> by convention using ?, something like
> http://nyetwork.not/foo.xml?%23SomeName
Yep. A long-forgotten XLink draft included a Query construct[2]:
---------------------
Query ::= 'XML-XPTR=' (XPointer | Name)
------------------------
An even more interesting option (which didn't fit the URI specs) was
[3]:
------------------------
Locator ::= URL
| Connector (XPointer | Name)
| URL Connector (XPointer | Name)
Connector ::= '#' | '|' | '?XML-XPTR='
...
* If the connector is "#", this signals an intent that the containing
resource is to be fetched as a whole from the host that provides it, and
that the XPointer processing to extract the sub-resource is to be
performed on the client, that is to say on the same system where the
linking element is recognized and processed.
* If the connector is "?XML-XPTR=", this signals an intent that the
entire locator is to be transmitted to the host providing the resource,
and that the host should perform the XPointer processing to extract the
sub-resource, and that only the sub-resource should be transmitted to
the client.
* If the connector is "|", no intent is signaled as to what processing
model is to be used to go about accessing the designated resource.
------------------------
Lost in the dustbin of history.
[1] - http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/1319
[2] - http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xml-link-970731#sec5.2
[3] - http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xml-link-970406#sec5.2
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com
|
