W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > June 2003

[uri] <none>

From: Mark Thomson <marktt@excite.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 08:05:38 -0400
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20030614080533.05602578@localhost>
To: uri@w3.org







In addition to the semantic bug, I think the assumption that the base URI 
doesn't contain dot-segments in its path should be dropped. If a URI has an 
absolute path beginning with a "//" and doesn't have an authority, then the 
absolute path must be written as /.//...

Another example where the target URI would be invalid is if the relative 
URI is scheme:/.//ff or scheme:/..//ff and the parser is strict or the 
parser is non-strict and base URI's scheme != relative URI's scheme.

One more thing. If the relative URI has a scheme then, regardless of the 
base URI, the target URI will equal the relative URI for a strict parser. 
Should the algorithm fail in this case if the base URI is illegal (doesn't 
have a scheme) even though the target URI has nothing to do with the base 
URI? (i.e., should the assumption "only the scheme component is required to 
be present in the base URI" be dropped in this case?)


_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web! 
Received on Saturday, 14 June 2003 08:40:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:31 GMT