W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > May 2006

RE: Canonicalization xml:base processing

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 13:04:26 -0400
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D30203755123@HQ-MAIL4.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: "Richard Tobin" <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>, "Konrad Lanz" <Konrad.Lanz@iaik.tugraz.at>
Cc: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>

Richard,

Just to check my understanding of one small part,
when you say the base URI at some point is some
URI whose last segment is a file name and/or fragment,
what does this mean?  I thought a base URI was 
effectively always a directory.  So, for example,
when you say base-uri="file://three/four/a.file", do
you really mean the [base URI] is "file://three/four/"?

paul


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Tobin [mailto:richard@inf.ed.ac.uk] 
> Sent: Tuesday, 2006 May 30 11:56
> To: Konrad Lanz; Richard Tobin
> Cc: Grosso, Paul; public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Canonicalization xml:base processing
> 
> I started looking at this and realised that I was likely to make
> mistakes just in determining what the base URIs should be in the usual
> case where the absolute base URI is available, so I thought I would
> check we agree.
> 
> Here is your example:
> 
> >   <a xml:base="one/two">
> >     <b xml:base="//three/four/./five/./../file.xsd">
> >       <c xml:base="a.file"/>
> >       <d>
> >         <e xml:base="#bare-name">
> >           <f xml:base=""/>
> >           <f1/>
> >         </e>
> >         <g xml:base="//six/"/>
> >       </d>
> >       <h xml:base="http://www.iaik.tugraz.at">
> >         <i xml:base="/aboutus/people/index.php">
> >           <j xml:base="lanz/index.php">
> >         </i>
> >       </h>
> >     </b>
> >   </a>
> 
> Here it is with the base URIs added as an attribute on each element,
> assuming that the document's URI is file:///tmp/foo.xml:
> 
> <a base-uri="file:///tmp/one/two" xml:base="one/two">
>     <b base-uri="file://three/four/./five/./../file.xsd" 
>        xml:base="//three/four/./five/./../file.xsd">
>       <c base-uri="file://three/four/a.file"
>          xml:base="a.file"/>
>       <d base-uri="file://three/four/./five/./../file.xsd">
>         <e base-uri="file://three/four/#bare-name"
> 	   xml:base="#bare-name">
>           <f base-uri="file://three/four/"
> 	     xml:base=""/>
>           <f1 base-uri="file://three/four/#bare-name"/>
>         </e>
>         <g base-uri="file://six/"
> 	   xml:base="//six/"/>
>       </d>
>       <h base-uri="http://www.iaik.tugraz.at"
>          xml:base="http://www.iaik.tugraz.at">
>         <i 
> base-uri="http://www.iaik.tugraz.at/aboutus/people/index.php"
> 	   xml:base="/aboutus/people/index.php">
>           <j 
> base-uri="http://www.iaik.tugraz.at/aboutus/people/lanz/index.php"
> 	     xml:base="lanz/index.php"/>
>         </i>
>       </h>
>     </b>
>   </a>
> 
> I was surprised that <b> still has the . and .., but that is right
> according to RFC2396: because the path is absolute, the algorithm is
> not applied to it.  The interpretation of xml:base="" and
> xml:base="#fragment" are still in doubt.
> 
> Do you agree with the above base URIs?
> 
> -- Richard
> 
Received on Tuesday, 30 May 2006 17:07:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:34 GMT