Re: issue-base-param

On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 18:56 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> 
> I am unclear whether the discussion of this issue included discussion of 
>   either xml:base or the html base element:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#edef-BASE
> 
> I suspect any <base> declaration in the head of an XHTML family document 
> has scope over relative references in the head and body, and hence also 
> links and anchors with rel="transformation"
> 
> I suspect xml:base does not apply in these cases (not permitted in valid 
> XHTML).
> 
> I am unclear whether the following  use of xml:base is relevant to the 
> following single element XML document
> 
> <r
>     xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#"
>     xml:base = "http://www.example.org/"
>     g:transformation="xform" />
> 
> Should a GRDDL aware agent try to get http://www.example.org/xform for 
> this example?

yes.

> None of these suspicions are answers positively or negatively in the text.

Oh?

[[
Given an XPath[XPATH] root node N with root element E, if the
expression 
/*/@*[local-name()="transformation"
  and namespace-uri()=
    "http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#"]
matches an attribute of an element E, then for each space-separated
token REF in the value of that attribute, the resource
identified[WEBARCH] by the absolute form (see section 5.2 Relative
Resolution in [RFC3986]) of REF with respect to the base IRI of E is a
GRDDL transformation of N.
]]

The base IRI of E, in this case, is http://www.example.org/ .
Or is it... XPath doesn't cite xml base... crud... don't
tell me we need a normative dependency on the XQuery data model...

Looks like infoset would be enough...

"Several information items have a [base URI] or [declaration base URI]
property. These are computed according to [XML Base]."
http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/#intro.baseURIs


I added a todo... the rule box to think about this.
http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec
Revision 1.241  2007/03/29 19:51:01  connolly
considering citing Infoset spec re xml:base

Specific text changes welcome.

I mostly think this is editorial, i.e. it doesn't merit re-opening
issue-base-param. Harry, you might want to give that a think.

Jeremy, this is worth adding to the test suite in any case.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Thursday, 29 March 2007 19:54:17 UTC