• To: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• Subject: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 22:55:01 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200111120212.CAA11374@p...>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E401C9B300@u...> <E1632Yw-0006KT-00@s...> <200111120212.CAA11374@p...>

On Sunday 11 November 2001 09:12 pm, David Carlisle wrote:
> the advantage of foo.xml#bar over either of the above is that the #bar
> fragment id syntax is supported by a range of mime types.

Like what? HTML and what others? Also, who actually uses it? Most of the 
times I've ever seen ID attributes used in HTML is in the context of an 
anchor.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
    • From: Justin Couch <justin@v...>
  • Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
  • Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• References:
  • RE: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
    • From: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@S...>
  • Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
  • Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• Next by Date: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• Previous by thread: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• Next by thread: Re: So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread