- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 16:14:20 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Unless someone considers otherwise, I consider this editorial, as it does not require a new decision, just a careful reading of existing XML specs and working them into GRDDL. Dan Connolly wrote: > On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 18:56 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > >> I am unclear whether the discussion of this issue included discussion of >> either xml:base or the html base element: >> http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#edef-BASE >> >> I suspect any <base> declaration in the head of an XHTML family document >> has scope over relative references in the head and body, and hence also >> links and anchors with rel="transformation" >> >> I suspect xml:base does not apply in these cases (not permitted in valid >> XHTML). >> >> I am unclear whether the following use of xml:base is relevant to the >> following single element XML document >> >> <r >> xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#" >> xml:base = "http://www.example.org/" >> g:transformation="xform" /> >> >> Should a GRDDL aware agent try to get http://www.example.org/xform for >> this example? >> > > yes. > > >> None of these suspicions are answers positively or negatively in the text. >> > > Oh? > > [[ > Given an XPath[XPATH] root node N with root element E, if the > expression > /*/@*[local-name()="transformation" > and namespace-uri()= > "http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#"] > matches an attribute of an element E, then for each space-separated > token REF in the value of that attribute, the resource > identified[WEBARCH] by the absolute form (see section 5.2 Relative > Resolution in [RFC3986]) of REF with respect to the base IRI of E is a > GRDDL transformation of N. > ]] > > The base IRI of E, in this case, is http://www.example.org/ . > Or is it... XPath doesn't cite xml base... crud... don't > tell me we need a normative dependency on the XQuery data model... > > Looks like infoset would be enough... > > "Several information items have a [base URI] or [declaration base URI] > property. These are computed according to [XML Base]." > http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/#intro.baseURIs > > > I added a todo... the rule box to think about this. > http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec > Revision 1.241 2007/03/29 19:51:01 connolly > considering citing Infoset spec re xml:base > > Specific text changes welcome. > > I mostly think this is editorial, i.e. it doesn't merit re-opening > issue-base-param. Harry, you might want to give that a think. > > Jeremy, this is worth adding to the test suite in any case. > > > -- -harry Harry Halpin, University of Edinburgh http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2007 20:14:29 UTC