X pointer would benefit from offering the option of developed modest feature set, many vendors involved in developing X pointer. Though many tried nobody has set the goal of speed implementation the single complete implementation of x pointer took about two weeks and four known external implementations of FIXptr proposal each took about half a day compared to the process of x pointer implementations getting four implementations to try the proposal on a casual basis was so easy and with this no users of x pointer would lose anything, many
The XML dev mailing list has been discussing the licensing terms for the patent Since Elliote Rusty Harold made a recommendation of the rejection of the specification. Danielle Veillard, the chair of Xpointer meetings, mentioned that it would be fruitless to chase them all since no progress would be made. However he was sympathetic to the patent itself.An analysis of the situation was made by Tim Bray. He described it as a big problem and made a suggestion that it would be more responsible for the sun to make a declaration that the patent had
Debates on the XML-DEV and XSL mailing lists over the last two weeks concern the futures of XSLT, XPath, and, the latest addition to the W3C XML toolkit, XML Query. There are no signs of these debates ending this week. Discussion on XML-DEV about the design of XML Query rages on.
Reinventing the Wheel
The focus of last week's XML-Deviant was the concern expressed by several XML-DEV contributors that the interdependence of several W3C specifications may have exceeded the dictates of software reuse and become instead a tangled mess. Suggestions were
Since Elliotte Rusty Harold recommended "complete rejection of this specification until such time as Sun's patent can be dealt with more reasonably," the XML-dev mailing list has been discussing the licensing terms for the patent.
Daniel Veillard, who chaired XPointer meetings on the subject, noted that "We can't chase them all and if we did we would make no progress every effort would be wasted doing those Patent lookups and fighting them :-(((," though he clearly had little sympathy for the patent itself.
Tim Bray described the situation as "a
listen Wednesday April 12, 2006 1:49AM
by Rick Jelliffe in Opinion
Last week on XML-DEV I suggested that there should be a competition with prize money to stimulate development of faster XML parsers suitable for high transaction work. Elliotte Harold even quoted my (not original) Open Source is not a free lunch, it is stone soup.
There are examples of industry consortia sponsoring such development: the OpenMP implementation contest for example. And groups such as OSDL offer fellowships to make sure strategic software is maintained.
At the
The XML Linking Working Group has completed its work and is no longer active. The XML Activity Statement discusses the W3C's work on XML as a whole; the XML Linking Working Group's final charter covers its last set of work on XML Linking and XPointer in more detail. Responsibility for maintenance of documents issued by the WG rests with the XML Core Working Group in the first instance.
A public registry for XPointer schemes is available.
Check the Implementation Chart.
XML Linking and XML Base reached Recommendation status on June 27th
In 1997 Sun Microsystems and Jakob Nielson, the noted web design and usability guru, were granted a patent on a "Method and system for implementing hypertext scroll attributes" by the US Patent Office. The patent describes the process of using a string to define an external anchor for an HTML document. The string is defined in the link to the HTML document, and the web browser, on loading the document defined by the link, will scroll to the first occurrence of the text string within the document -- hardly an innovation.
The first sign that this, like
[Apologies for the cross-post. This discussion started on xml-dev, but
has clear relevance to www-xml-linking-comments for XPointer and
www-xml-xinclude-comments for XInclude.]
The use of XPointer [1] by XML Inclusions (XInclude) [2] has some
processing implications which substantially increase the cost
(development, CPU cycles, memory) of a conformant implementation of
XInclude.
Section 4.2 of the XInclude spec [3] states that:
>When parsing as XML, the fragment part of the URI reference is
>interpreted as an XPointer [XPointer],
RSS/XML