W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > March 2007

[whatwg] <base> versus xml:base

From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 20:07:38 +0000
Message-ID: <86928EB6-2C93-425E-8C6A-08AF8A5A9590@googlemail.com>

On 2 Mar 2007, at 19:25, Keryx Web wrote:

> Anne van Kesteren skrev:
>> I think <base> should also be allowed in XML documents. It  
>> simplifies the language, it already needs to be supported and  
>> <base> is able to set Document.baseURI where xml:base can at most  
>> set Document.documentElement.baseURI. (Document.baseURI influences  
>> how XMLHttpRequest works for instance.)
>> The <base> element section should probably also talk about what  
>> happens when you modify the .href attribute.
> And today the base element already works in at least FFox and Opera  
> also when content is sent as true XHTML 1.0, so this would not  
> really change anything but the spec.

XHTML 1.0/1.1 doesn't allow xml:base, though, so <base> is the only  
way to set a base URL within the document.

- Geoffrey Sneddon
Received on Friday, 2 March 2007 12:07:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:33 UTC