Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 11:37:36AM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> Daniel Veillard scripsit:
> > s/blur/break/ as well as entities references which were here from the start,
> > and the BASE in HTML breaks it too.
> Not really; both of them are metadata-in-the-data kludges, based on the lack of a clean portable standardized freely adjustable metadata layer.
RFC 2396 endorses it as I pointed out in section 5.1
> > Nothing in 4.1. Fragment Identifier seems to prevent
> > the fragment ID to also depend on the enclosed document content, but maybe
> > I didn't found the right sentence :-)
> You might as well say that nothing seems to prevent the interpretation of
> fragment IDs from depending on the phase of the moon. If they do, goodby
Well currently interop is not addressed, there is no way to get the
semantic of the XPointer from the namespaced scheme name. At least if you
have an identified registry you know where to look for the information,
and RFC 2396 says it should be looked up in the RFC or the document describing
the Mime-Type of the returned resource.
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
email@example.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/