W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > July 2009

RE: Calumet and relative URIs

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 10:18:20 -0400
Message-ID: <6E216CCE0679B5489A61125D0EFEC787104A20EB@CORPUSMX10A.corp.emc.com>
To: <xproc-dev@w3.org>
I think I am going to make the command-line and Java API in sync
(=resolving against cwd).
The "baseuri" command-line switch also sounds like a good/useful idea to
me.
 
Thanks Florent and David for your feedback.
 
Regards,
Vojtech


________________________________

	From: David A. Lee [mailto:dlee@calldei.com] 
	Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 4:10 PM
	To: Toman, Vojtech
	Cc: xproc-dev@w3.org
	Subject: Re: Calumet and relative URIs
	
	
	I agree your argument is better.
	Especially in the light of a command line interface like 
	
	
	calumet -i source=../data/doc.xml
http://foo/pipelines/pipeline.xpl
	and the coresponding Java.
	
	new Source("../data/doc.xml")
	
	both "seem like they should" come from the filesystem. 
	 
	I think it "seems the same way" to me now, too... :)
	
	
	Now there's always room for a "third way", that is from the
command line allow a -baseuri used for resolution.
	I do that in many xmlsh commands to allow "both ways" to be used
so I'm always right :) (or always wrong ... :)
	
	say 
	
	calumet -baseuri http://foo/pipelines -i source=../data/doc.xml
pipeline.xpl
	In the java code this would do the appropriate URI resolution
against an explicit base.
	
	
Received on Thursday, 23 July 2009 14:19:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 23 July 2009 14:19:53 GMT