Hidden anchors in SCXML specification - can I refer to them?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Hidden anchors in SCXML specification - can I refer to them?

Stefan Radomski
Hi there,

I implemented some more functions to validate a given SCXML document and would like to refer to the specific paragraphs when complaining about violations at runtime. I see that there are quite a few anchors available in the actual SCXML recommendation that are not linked but would be available to refer to per URL fragment, e.g. http://www.w3.org/TR/scxml/#N10AD3. Can I expect these to be consistent among releases of the standard?

Best regards
Stefan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hidden anchors in SCXML specification - can I refer to them?

Jim Barnett
Those anchors are artifacts of the spec-generation script we use, and I have no idea how stable they have been across drafts.  However the SCXML 1.0 Recommendation document will not be modified once it is published, so it would be safe to refer to anchors in it.

 If we do an SCXML 1.1 or 2.0, it will be a completely different document and any part of the 1.0 specification may be modified or removed.

- Jim

On 7/16/2015 5:28 AM, Stefan Radomski wrote:
Hi there,

I implemented some more functions to validate a given SCXML document and would like to refer to the specific paragraphs when complaining about violations at runtime. I see that there are quite a few anchors available in the actual SCXML recommendation that are not linked but would be available to refer to per URL fragment, e.g. http://www.w3.org/TR/scxml/#N10AD3. Can I expect these to be consistent among releases of the standard?

Best regards
Stefan