Re: same-document references

• From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
• Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 11:55:28 -0400
• To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
• CC: public-iri@w3.org
• Message-ID: <4E04B370.8000304@mit.edu>

On 6/24/11 11:43 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> I'm not entirely sure whether section 4.4 tries to rule out this
> behavior, but if it does, that appears to be indeed a problem. May be
> this needs to be phrased as "may skip a new retrieval action", instead
> of "should not result in..."?

Or maybe that paragraph should be removed?

Note that it's also not clear to me whether the definition of 
"same-document reference" as something that matches the _base_ URI as 
opposed to the _document_ URI matches UA practice...

-Boris

Received on Friday, 24 June 2011 15:55:57 UTC