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.
On fragment identifiers, SVG, SMIL, and XHTML all have potential problems.
I'm even more concerned that there are a lot of XML applications out there
which haven't considered the problem at all - it's not something that comes
up as a question in XML tutorials that I've seen. (I'll be adding it to
future editions, believe me.)
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.
While I'd like to say across the board that EVERYONE should use XPointer in
all its glory when they use XML, it's awfully hard to push that when the
W3C hasn't made that case across the board.
It's hard to push it while we still have language like this [1]:
XPointer [XPTR] allows components of XML documents to be addressed
in terms of their placement in the XML structure rather than on
their unique identifiers. This allows referencing of any portion
of an XML document without having to modify that document. Without
XPointer, pointing within a document may require adding unique
identifiers to it, or inserting specific elements into the document,
such as a named anchor in HTML. XPointers are put within the fragment
identifier part of a URI [URI]. The SMIL 2.0 specification does not
require that browsers be able to process XPointers in SMIL 2.0 URI
attributes.
[1] -
http://www.w3.org/TR/smil20/extended-linking.html#SMILLinking-Relationship-t
o-XPointer
Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books