- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 17:00:18 -0500
- To: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>
- Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 17:14 -0400, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: > On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Dan Connolly wrote: [...] > 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/ Huh? xpath doesn't cite infoset. Oops... yes, it does, but only in "B XML Information Set Mapping (Non-Normative)". > > 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'm not sure that's enough. I'm standing by for further advice. > > 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. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2007 22:00:30 UTC