Re: MUST use Content-Base

On Wed, 14 Jan 1998, Foteos Macrides wrote:

> in HTML documents.  I disgree that if retained in the HTTP/1.1
> Draft Standard support for it by clients should be considered optional,
> but have no strong opinion on whether it should be retained or deleted.
> If deleted, this should not be with the intention of later reviving
> it with a change in rules such that it takes precedence over an actual
> BASE element in the entity-body.

I don't think we need to decide at this point in time if a revival
changes the semantics or offers the server control over precedence.

That said, it has finally sunk into my thick skull that there is a
semantic difference between Content-location and <base>/Content-base.

The origin for relative URL interpretation is acquired from
Content-location by parsing off the 'file name piece' where as the origin
for <base> is explicit.  The <base>/content-base allows an application
to utilize a relative base for the whole application and to use
relative URL references within the document without consideration of where
a particular page appears within the structure.  Content-location is
an alternative to the request URL and requires that all links within
pages be written with full knowledge of their own context.

I think Content-base should be removed from the specification but I 
did want to note that use of Content-location really isn't equivalent.

Dave Morris

Received on Wednesday, 14 January 1998 15:07:33 UTC