- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 11:29:02 +0100
- To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
- Cc: "'Dan Brickley'" <danbri@w3.org>, public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Mark Birbeck wrote: > Dan, > > >>iv) xml:base, relative URIs in ns declarations etc? >> >>eg. test case: >> >><link xmlns:foaf="/foaf/0.1/" xml:base="http://xmlns.com/" >>rel="foaf:maker"> >> <meta property="foaf:name">Dan Brickley</meta> >> <link property="foaf:homepage" resource="http://danbri.org/"/> >> <link rel="foaf:knows"> >> <meta property="foaf:name">Dan Connolly</meta> >> </link> >></link> >> >>...does this generate the same triples? > > > Namespaces are not currently regarded as being relative to xml:base, > although XML Base does leave things open for applications to 'honour' > xml:base at some higher level if they want to. However, I suggest we don't > go that route ;). We should of course make @about and @resource behave > according to xml:base, though. > > So, to answer the question, I would say that your XML Base example should > *not* generate the same triples as the first example. (I've not read the earlier thread) This xml:base example is simply illegal - namespace declarations must be absolute - (a plenary decision). See errata of Namespaces in XML 1.0 or Namespaces 1.1. It generates an error and no triples. Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 4 August 2004 06:29:46 UTC