[rfc-i] [IAB] draft-iab-xml2rfc-03, "B.2 Anchors and IDs"

[paul.hoffman at vpnc.org (Paul Hoffman)]

On 9 May 2016, at 16:06, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:

> On 5/9/16, 5:06 AM, "IAB on behalf of Julian Reschke" 
> <iab-bounces at iab.org on behalf of julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>
>
>
>> <https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-xml2rfc-03.html#rfc.section.B.2>
>>
>> "Authors can leave anchors in a document that can later be used for
>> references with the "anchor" attribute. Anchors can be included in 
>> the
>> following elements: <artwork>, <aside>, <blockquote>, <cref>, 
>> <figure>,
>> <li>, <reference>, <referencegroup>, <section>, <sourcecode>, <t>, 
>> and
>> <table>. The author can then refer to that anchor in the "target"
>> attribute of the <xref> element."
>>
>> This is inaccurate, as the grammar allows anchor attributes on more
>> elements, such as the child elements of <table>.

I have removed the manually-entered list.

>> In general, I'm +1 on allowing anchors for everything that creates a
>> well-defined anchor point in the document -- even when it might be
>> impossible to auto-create prose when xref'ing that point.
>
> Agree.  I'm fine with the preptool throwing an error if it can't 
> figure out text to generate.

I'm not seeing any text in the preptool document that relates to this.

>> That said, there are many other elements that IMHO would need to 
>> allow
>> anchors as well: note, boilerplate, xref, relref, tt, strong, em, 
>> sub,
>> sup, spanx, and bcp14.
>
> Can we add those in the bis version?

+1 to the request. I don't see a "need" to anchor in non-block text, nor 
to obscure blocks.

On 9 May 2016, at 23:15, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Before we talk about "bis" versions, can we please have a new set of 
> drafts? I believe over the last weeks, many issues have been reported 
> that ought to be addressed...

We are addressing them, albeit slowly.

--Paul Hoffman