Re: issue-base-param

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, 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).

This is very disturbing if true, as XHTML *is* dependent on the XML 
infoset which has native coverage of URI resolution WRT a base, so I can't 
imagine why xml:base would not apply.

>>
>> 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.

They are answered by the chain of normative dependencies.

> 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...

No need at all (XML dependency chain):

* http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath
* http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset
* http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlbase/

So much easier when you are dealing with well-formed markup =)

> 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

Which calls out the xml-base specification ...

> 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

You don't need to, we already have a normative dependency on XPath 1.0

> 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.

It certainly does not merit re-opening the issue, IMHO.

Chimezie Ogbuji
Lead Systems Analyst
Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
9500 Euclid Avenue/ W26
Cleveland, Ohio 44195
Office: (216)444-8593
ogbujic@ccf.org

Received on Thursday, 29 March 2007 21:29:43 UTC