W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > March 2007

[whatwg] <base> versus xml:base

From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 21:48:57 +0000
Message-ID: <D400D5E0-A8CD-44F4-859C-FBA743F8030E@googlemail.com>

On 5 Mar 2007, at 21:07, Keryx Web wrote:

> Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
> > XHTML 1.0/1.1 doesn't allow xml:base, though, so <base> is the  
> only > > way to set a base URL within the document.
>
> In what way would the XHTML 1.0/1.1 spec **disallow** the use of  
> this element from the xml namespace? It's not *part of* the spec,  
> but that's a different matter, right?


xml:lang and xml:base are the actual attribute names ? the XML  
namespace exists so they work within namespace aware parsers (as XML- 
Names is a separate spec that extends XML) ? therefore, it must be  
explicitly allowed within the DTD (like xml:lang is).


- Geoffrey Sneddon
Received on Monday, 5 March 2007 13:48:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:53 UTC