- From: Colin Paul Adams <colin@colina.demon.co.uk>
- Date: 09 Feb 2005 10:00:14 +0000
- To: "Michael Kay" <mhk@mhk.me.uk>
- Cc: "'Ashok Malhotra'" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, "'K Karun'" <k.karun@oracle.com>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Kay <mhk@mhk.me.uk> writes: >> It is clear, I think. There is nothing that says that the >> xml:base attribute value must be absolute, therefore it can be >> relative. But the infoset says that the [bas URI] property is >> determined according to XML Base, and this says that the base >> URI of an element is the value of the xml:base attribute if it >> is present. so this property can be a relative URI that needs >> resolving. >> >> Now fn:resolve-uri (first form) uses the base URI property from >> the static context, which is defined to be an absolute URI. Michael> But the common use case for resolve uri is Michael> resolve-uri(@href, base-uri(.)) Michael> so we need to ensure that base-uri(.) delivers an Michael> absolute URI. I agree with this 100%. Michael> We could do this either by saying that the Michael> base-uri() function takes the base-uri property of the I assume you mean the dm:base-uri accessor value - not the infoset property (currently the data model defines the two to be the same). Michael> node and, if it is relative, resolves it recursively; or Michael> we could say that the base-uri property of the node is Michael> the pre-resolved absolute value. You can't re-define the infoset property, so I guess you again mean the dm:base-uri accessor value. Or am I missing something? I can't find any data-model property values. -- Colin Paul Adams Preston Lancashire
Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2005 10:08:35 UTC