- From: Daniel Veillard <daniel@veillard.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 16:09:00 +0200
- To: Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 02:40:15PM +0100, Richard Tobin wrote: > > I exchanged email with Roy Fielding concerning the interpretation of > xml:base attributes. > > He says that same-document references are only relevant for retrieval. > RFC 2396 clearly says in the section on resolving relative references > (5.2 step 2) that an empty URI reference is a reference to the current > document, but RFC 3986 does not mention it in that context, and Roy > says that RFC 3986 was specifically intended to correct > misunderstandings about same-document references. > > If we accept this, then we can return to believing that xml:base="" > is a no-op, which is certainly less surprising. To test current > implementations, I have created an XInclude document which produces > different results depending on how xml:base="" is interpreted. > > Please point your XInclude implementation at > > http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/xinclude-base-test/start.xml > > and see what the result is. Looks fine to me, paphio:~/XML -> xmllint --xinclude http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/xinclude-base-test/start.xml <?xml version="1.0"?> <x xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude"> <x xml:base="subdir/"> <x> Your XInclude processor supports xml:base </x> <x xml:base=""> <x> Your XInclude processor treats xml:base="" as a no-op. </x> </x> </x> </x> paphio:~/XML -> Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ daniel@veillard.com | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ http://veillard.com/ |
Received on Wednesday, 7 June 2006 14:10:38 UTC