Re: Comments on new draft of 3023bis (fragments, xpointer)

On Friday, February 25, 2005, 5:20:01 AM, Paul wrote:



PG> That's why I think it is important to say that the
PG> fragment identifier syntax for the XML type is just
PG> the XPointer Framework and Element() scheme, and
PG> nothing else--all other schemes must be ignored.  

To be clear - you are saying that

- for application/xml
- for unknown +xml media types being processed as xml

the fragment identifier syntax for the XML type is just the XPointer
Framework and Element() scheme, and nothing else--all other schemes must
be ignored.

"Ignored" needs to be further defined (ie, it does not cause an error).

And to be clear, you are *not* saying that

- any +xml media type is forbidden from defining its own, richer,
fragment identifier syntax in addition to that defined fro +xml as a
whole.

Right?

-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:[email protected]
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead