- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 02:39:48 +0000
- To: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I wasn't at the f2f, for which apologies, but I find myself made
uneasy by the proposal to retain 'inheritance' of xml:base. As you
say, this doesn't always give the 'right' results. What I find
frustrating is that it's easy to state a strategy which _would_ always
give the 'right' answer, namely:
"Use the name *EII* for an element information item to be
canonicalized, and *EIIC* for the element information item
corresponding to *EII* in the result of parsing the canonical
serialization of the node-set containing *EII*.
"Synthesize an xml:base attribute for *EII* iff the *EIIC*'s [base
URI] would otherwise be different from *EII*'s [base URI]."
This has the advantage that not only does it correctly produce
<a xml:base="http://example.org">
<c xml:base="test"/>
</a>
from
<a xml:base="http://example.org">
<b xml:base="test">
<c/>
</b>
</a>
when <b>...</b> is filtered out, but it will _also_ correctly produce
<a xml:base="http://example.org">
<c xml:base="http://example.org/test/test"/>
</a>
from
<a xml:base="http://example.org">
<b xml:base="test">
<c xml:base="test"/>
</b>
</a>
when <b>...</b> is filtered out.
But we can't say it that way, because C14N as written does not use the
infoset.
Can't we come up with a way to get this effect?
ht
- --
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEC6D4kjnJixAXWBoRAkneAJ417KG5iuoNs0ZhXj7lgYsyRYT2QQCZAXRf
GHNr/f18zgfJI6vJ4GSkhlc=
=LuAk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Monday, 6 March 2006 02:40:06 UTC