Re: [ubl] Second UBL 1.0 Q/A build, take 2 (20 April)

[Eduardo Gutentag <Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM>]

My apologies, Fabio just pointed to me that we're not talking about
unused anchors, but rather about used anchors that have no target
anchors. There are two in the CM document, both the product of a but
in the stylesheets used to produce the HTML (the anchors are there in
the original XML).

Jon, I assume it's too late to do anything about this, right?

On 04/22/2004 10:15 AM, Eduardo Gutentag wrote:
> Unused anchors never hurt anybody, I don't see why they should
> be either pointed at or removed. In fact they provide anchors
> for third parties to link into the document. What's wrong with
> that?
> 
> On 04/21/2004 05:27 PM, Jon.Bosak@Sun.COM wrote:
> 
>> [Fabio.Arciniegas@postgraphy.com:]
>>
>> | Attached you will find a physical report of broken links (none)
>> | and other factors in the UBL distibution as it currently
>> | stands. Please note that although there are no broken hyperlinks
>> | there is a number of broken local anchors.
>>
>> The unused anchors are in the CM and FS pieces.  I trust that the
>> authors will take these out in the next revisions; no need to
>> bother with them now.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster 
>> of the OASIS TC), go to 
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/members/leave_workgroup.php. 
>>
>>
> 

-- 
Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
Web Technologies and Standards |         Phone:  +1 510 550 4616 x31442
Sun Microsystems Inc.          |         W3C AC Rep / OASIS BoD