W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: [widgets] i18n proposals document

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 11:33:52 +0200
Message-ID: <b21a10670905220233t6919d26fk6e7638c8304f1ee0@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Sledd <Andrew.Sledd@ikivo.com>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Hi Andy,

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Andrew Sledd <Andrew.Sledd@ikivo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I need confirmation that I understand the impact of F1 from the “Finding
> missing localized content”, specifically how the dynamic setting of the
> xml:base on the element influences subsequent localized content resolving,
> so please review my understanding and correct me if I have got it wrong.
>
>
>
> Is the expectation that the dynamically set xml:base is limited to the
> element itself and not recursively applied to all other resource resolution?
> That is, the dynamically set xml:base does not override the “base-folder”
> determined by the ua and widget locale matching. From the example (see
> excerpt from proposal below), the xml:base would be resolved to the widget
> root for the content element, but not impact the resource resolving for the
> elements in the index.htm file which reference the a.gif and the b.gif
> files. These would resolve to the locale/en-us-xx/  locale. Would their
> xml:base be expected to dynamically be set accordingly?

As there is no more notion of a base folder, and we no longer use
xml:base, then non of the above applies. However, it would be great to
get your thoughts on what is now in the spec.

Kind regards,
Marcos


-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 09:34:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:31 GMT