RE: XML Base

Documenting Brian's verbal suggestion.


We could ask the owners of the xml base rec for normative answers:

i.e. a list of

XML Base                           relativeURI
========                           ===========
EASY:
"http://example.org/dir/file"      "../relfile"
"http://example.org/dir/file"      "/absfile"
"http://example.org/dir/file"      "//another.example.org/absfile"

GETTING HARDER:
"http://example.org/dir/file"      "../../../relfile"
"http://example.org/dir/file"      ""
"http://example.org/dir/file"      "#frag"

MASTER CLASS:
"http://example.org"               "relfile"

"http://example.org/dir/file#frag" "relfile"
"http://example.org/dir/file#frag" "#foo"
"http://example.org/dir/file#frag" ""

"mailto:Jeremy_Carroll@hp.com"     "#foo"
"mailto:Jeremy_Carroll@hp.com"     ""
"mailto:Jeremy_Carroll@hp.com"     "relfile"




Any such set of answers (i.e. absolute URIs) would make our test cases
redundant.

The problem is, what if we don't like the answers for the same document
references.

2nd problem is, what will they do? ask the authors of RFC2396? ask the tag?


These test cases appeared because an ARP user complained that ARP screwed up
on one of them (the missing slash one). When I dug into it, I realised I
didn't know what the right answer was. So as a developer without such
answers I have difficulty.



Jeremy






> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian McBride [mailto:bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: 21 March 2002 16:42
> To: Jeremy Carroll; Dave Beckett
> Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: XML Base
>
>
> At 14:05 21/03/2002 +0000, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> [...]
>
> >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.
> >]]]
>
> Please can I have a short proposal for what we should do.
>
> Brian
>
>

Received on Thursday, 21 March 2002 12:23:46 UTC