[rfc-i] For v3: remove <format>?
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Fri Dec 27 02:02:07 PST 2013
On 2013-12-27 06:38, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org> wrote:
>> On Dec 26, 2013, at 11:38 AM, Nico Williams <nico at cryptonector.com> wrote:
>>>>> This needs to be first-class.
>> Sorry, I wasn't clear. Assuming that all the links we want will auto-generated from the <seriesInfo> element, why does <annotation> need to be first class?
> seriesInfo works for Internet documents, not for non-IETF/IRTF documents.
"The" link is generated using the "target" attribute on <reference>.
>> That seems like optimizing for a far edge case, particularly because that researcher could just look in the XML, not the HTML.
> That's the thing: how will the XML denote links to alternate formats?
> If there's no way to do that, then the researcher couldn't "just look
> in the XML" (i.e., not with XPath/XSLT).
I still don't understand why this is of any importance.
Best regards, Julian
More information about the rfc-interest