Re: same-document references

* Julian Reschke wrote:
>This is nice for cases where the URI of the entity actually is the same 
>as the base URI. However, if the base URI was actually *changed*, a new 
>retrieval operation *is* necessary; at least, this seems to be what HTML 
>UAs do here (note that even if the retrieved entity is the same 
>octet-for-octet, this will affect DOM changes (being discarded) and 
>observable behavior in the UA (as in events being fired)).

So, you have this DOM and some event like clicking a link. You then have
some specification that defines, given the DOM and given the event, then
something or other happens. And this specification says, for instance,

  The reference is X and the base reference is Y; retrieve X.

Then you can apply RFC 3986 and check whether X is a same-document re-
ference, and if it is, then retrieving X should not result in a new re-
trieval action. What X is, and what Y is, is entirely up to this speci-
fication, so if a new retrieval action is desired, then it can just de-
fine X and Y so that X is not a same-document reference (unless that'd
conflict with something else, but it's hard to imagine that).

Note that the interface here is

  rfc3986(X, Y, "retrieval action")

and not

  rfc3986(X, Y, "retrieval action", "Btw, Y was Z earlier")

So, whether anything has changed or not is not relevant when looking at
what RFC 3986 has to say on some matter in the context here.

So I don't see how RFC 3986 can be a problem here. It would help a lot
to have an example where a specification defines that you have a refer-
ence X, a base reference Y, where X is the same as Y minus the fragment,
where you want to retrieve X with a new retrieval action (but can't say,
for instance, that there is no base reference in force).
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/

Received on Saturday, 2 July 2011 02:21:00 UTC