- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:05:22 +0100
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Cc: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
* Norman Walsh wrote: >| XLink 1.0 does not define error handling behavior. It simply >| identifies those situations which are errors and leaves their handling >| to the application. >| >| While the WG recognizes that more detailed information about erorr >| handling might be valuable, if consensus could be reached on what that >| handling should be in the wide variety of applications that might use >| XLink, it does not consider such additions to be within the narrow >| scope of its charter for XLink 1.1. Consequently, the WG does not >| expect to make any changes with respect to error handling for XLink >| 1.1. >| >| Please let us know if you find this explanation satisfactory. >Have you had a chance to consider if the explanation above is >satisfactory? Well, from http://www.w3.org/mid/87oe5valhu.fsf@nwalsh.com I understand that whenever some element violates XLink 1.1 conformance requirements that implementations must behave as if there is no XLink markup relevant to the element; could you give a non-compliant fragment where this would not apply, i.e., where error handling is not defined? I am not sure yet what to make of these responses, but at the moment they seem rather in- consistent to me. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Tuesday, 22 November 2005 20:05:20 UTC