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
Thanks Florent and David for your feedback.


	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
	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 ... :)
	calumet -baseuri http://foo/pipelines -i source=../data/doc.xml
	In the java code this would do the appropriate URI resolution
against an explicit base.
Received on Thursday, 23 July 2009 14:19:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:03:05 UTC