[Bug 5542] How are SML URIs absolutized


Virginia Smith <virginia.smith@hp.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
           Keywords|editorial, needsReview      |
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #15 from Virginia Smith <virginia.smith@hp.com>  2008-08-29 17:19:40 ---
Fixed per comment #13, removed 'needsReview' per comment #14.

See diff at:

Changes are in sections 4.5, 5.3.2 - 5.3.4, 6.1.

Also, the 2nd note in 5.3.2 is changed slightly from the proposal. The 2nd
paragraph now reads:

"Consistency checking of base URI results by SML-IF consumers is made optional
to avoid requiring the potential overhead of performing twice as many
calculations per relative reference as is minimally required to consume the
model. An SML-IF consumer might choose to check base URI mechanism consistency
based on input parameters, always, never, or based on any other criteria it
chooses. <change>If both base URI mechanisms are used in a given interchange
model document contained within a conforming SML-IF document, and a consumer
understands both mechanisms, such a consumer must use the xml:base mechanism to
compute the [base URI] property. This consumer may choose to ignore the
smlif:baseURI information or it may choose to verify that consistent results
are obtained from both mechanisms.</change> If both base URI mechanisms are
used in a given interchange model document contained within a non-conforming
SML-IF document, SML-IF provides no guarantees about the consistency of any
[base URI] property computed using both mechanisms."

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Friday, 29 August 2008 17:20:18 UTC