W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > July to September 2000

RE: SYMM WG comments on XBase 2nd last call

From: Cohen, Aaron M <aaron.m.cohen@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 10:27:37 -0700
Message-ID: <D5E932F578EBD111AC3F00A0C96B1E6F0626ACB0@orsmsx31.jf.intel.com>
To: "'Jonathan Marsh'" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, "'Philipp Hoschka'" <ph@w3.org>
Cc: Patrick Schmitz <pschmitz@microsoft.com>, "'Lloyd Rutledge'" <Lloyd.Rutledge@cwi.nl>, "'www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>, "'symm@w3.org'" <symm@w3.org>, "'Paul Grosso'" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Okay. Thanks for the info. I'm okay with all of this, and it will only
requires minor changes when/if the time comes.
-Aaron 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 10:11 AM
> To: 'Philipp Hoschka'; Cohen, Aaron M
> Cc: Patrick Schmitz; 'Lloyd Rutledge';
> 'www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org'; 'symm@w3.org'; 'Paul Grosso'
> Subject: RE: SYMM WG comments on XBase 2nd last call
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Philipp Hoschka [mailto:ph@w3.org]
> > 
> > "Cohen, Aaron M" a écrit :
> > 
> > > Philipp:
> > > I didn't realize that you had to define what elements could 
> > take xbase.
> > > Doesn't it work with general XML, that doesn't have a 
> > semantic spec or a
> > > specific DTD? I've been looking at it as a sort of XML 
> > extension, somewhat
> > > indepedent of the specific XML application language.
> > 
> > i think you have to specify in the DTD where you can use 
> > xml:base; similar
> > to xml:lang, and xmlns, actually - if i'm wrong, i'm sure the 
> > xml linking
> > folks
> > will correct me
> 
> Yes, if you use a DTD for validation.  If your spec contains 
> a normative DTD
> it would be nice to have xml:base allowed on all elements (similarly
> xml:space and xml:lang if you don't provide specific 
> restrictions on them).
> 
> > > But if we do need to specify, we can certainly just say 
> > that it's valid
> > > (although not necessarily meaningful) on all SML elements.
> > 
> > i guess so - i would hope that it is meaningful, though  it 
> > may not be useful,
> > 
> > but that's another issue - quickly checking the draft, it 
> > seems that xml:base
> > *is* actually meaningful wherever you chose to put it
> 
> The intent is that xml:base can appear on any element in well-formed
> documents.  If you want to restrict that further, you can by making a
> normative DTD.
> 
> But the bigger issue for SMIL support of xml:base is to 
> declare in the SMIL
> draft which attributes/content represents URIs (presumeably 
> you already do
> this), and that these URIs are interpreted according to XML Base.  For
> instance, you might add something like I did in XInclude.  See
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2000/07/WD-xinclude-20000705#IDwuAq1
> (specificallly the first 2 paragraphs, the list, and the 
> following sentence)
> which specifies how URIs are treated in regards to the I18N 
> character model
> and XML Base.
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 7 July 2000 13:27:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:40 GMT