Re: Conformance value of "+xml"?
Tim Bray <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.xml-mime |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
At 11:29 AM 26/09/00 -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote: >At 09:59 AM 9/26/00 -0400, Mark Baker wrote: >>My understanding from Dan was that the cat's already out of the bag; SVG >>uses +xml. Not quite yet, but as Chris says, probably will. >On the other hand, I'm not sure that the problem is quite as drastic as it >seems. Any XML application can point into an SVG, SMIL, or XHTML document >using XPointer. It's just that SVG, SMIL, and XHTML applications may not >let those documents point _out_ using XPointer. Right. I think that the +xml idiom is useful even if it doesn't guarantee that such documents are going use XLink/XPointer for outgoing links. Hmm, it also seems that anything that's of type *+xml has, per definition, internal structures which can be addressed by xpointer whether the media-type designers foresaw that or not. -Tim