- From: Eve L. Maler <elm@arbortext.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 15:23:14 -0500
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Cc: W3C-SGML-WG@w3.org
At 08:48 AM 3/14/97 -0800, Tim Bray wrote:
>More reports from the March 8 and 12 meetings. Attendence was confusing:
>every member of the ERB was in attendence in part, but there was a
>certain amount of checking in and out based on travel plans and
>interruptions; my notes record no dissenting votes to any of
>the following, but some member who missed a particular vote may
>choose to record a dissent:
>
...
>2. We discussed the idea of having a way to provide a base address;
>the LOCATION-SOURCE and IMPLIED-LOCATION-SOURCE stuff in the initial
>draft. The ERB is powerfully in favor of giving entities a way to
>specify the canonical address by which they'd like to be referred to,
>bookmarked, relative address computed, etc. But we realize this is
>really not XML-LINK stuff, just a very convenient convenience feature
>for the XML language itself. So we provisionally decided (provisionally
>because this hasn't had WG exposure) to create a new per-entity
><?XML-BASE PI and write that into the language spec. We could not,
>at this time, muster support for the IMPLIED-LOCATION-SOURCE stuff.
...
We thought that it would be handy to be able to provide multiple base
locations, which you'd be able to do if you repeated the PI. My
preference, which you all must be tired of hearing about at this point :-),
would be syntax like this (a fake GI along with the attribute structure):
<?XML base locator="..."?>
.
.
.
Eve
Received on Friday, 14 March 1997 15:27:04 UTC