how does XML Base affects well-formedness? [was: red/green XML]

At 10:43 2000 06 06 -0400, keshlam@us.ibm.com wrote:
>>TBL had written:
>>I agree that that is a huge problem with XBase.
>>(Has anyone made that comment formally?)
>
>The DOM WG raised a concern about the interaction of XBase and relative
>namespaces when we were asked to review the XBase proposal. Since the DOM
>Level 2 design assumed the Literal interpretation, our belief was that
>XBase should not affect Namespaces.
>
>But if validity can be defined in terms of absolutized relative references,
>as the Absolutize proposal suggests, that means validity is affected by
>XBase. Note that a relative pointer to the schema (however that pointer is
>associated with the document) might experience the same effect, so I'm not
>sure this is new breakage.

Whoa, you are talking about schema-validity with assumptions that namespace
names point to schemas, etc.  You've made a pile of assumptions that go
beyond XML Base, the DOM's comment, or the current topic of discussion.
(I don't necessarily disagree with your comments, but I'm interested in
this claim that XML Base affects well-formedness.)

The claim was that there is a "huge problem" with XML Base because 
awareness or lack thereof can alter the well-formedness of a document,
and I disagree and request an example.

paul

Received on Tuesday, 6 June 2000 11:54:21 UTC