- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 14:05:09 -0000
- To: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Dave Beckett" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Jeremy:
> >Seems like a proposal to:
> >
> >- draw the relevant XML wg's attention to difficulties in interpretating
> >xml:base with same document references, (particularly when the base is a
> >URIref).
> >
> >- select the xml:base test cases that:
> > - test general URI resolution
> > - test general xml:base behaviour
> > and mark them as non-normative
Brian:
> or just delete them. Can we have a list of the ones you think we should
> keep and we can try to decide this Friday.
>
My original message highlighted:
[[[
Test case 007 - 013
examples of the combination of a base URI and a
relative URI or same document reference, showing
various different cases.
]]]
and the three error cases (now error001/test017 and test 15 and 16).
===
I have difficulty with deleting these, since practically these are:
+ significant
+ subject to dispute
Hence, refusing to judge on this, because it is not in our competence, acts
to make the meaning of RDF/XML documents that contain XML Base (in the
dubious cases) doubtful.
The fact that they generate discussion is indicative of the need for at
least guidance from the WG; even if it is not in our competence.
Some of these test cases are no brainers, others do commit to a position.
The former are not objectionable and can be retained without much problem;
the latter are needed for a standard use of xml:base.
I am arguing a catch 22, if you want to delete these, it is because some
people disagree with them, which is why we need them. I am happy with
deleting the ones that nobody disagrees with.
cf.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Mar/0061.html
which disagrees with some of these test cases.
Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2002 09:05:28 UTC