- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 04:28:41 -0700
- To: 'Sanjiva Weerawarana' <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org
Sanjiva, This is issues 148. Issue 148: Double check URI comparison algorithm and relative URI use [1]. We discussed this at the Cannes F2F in March 2004. And, RESOLUTION: Change all URIs EXCEPT import/@location and include/@location to absolute URIs at the XML document level [2]. ACTION: Editors to change spec to require absolute URIs and indicate that comparison must be done character-by-character as per TAG finding [2]. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x148 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Mar/0039.html Asir -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 2:13 AM To: www-ws-desc@w3.org Subject: absolute vs. relative URIs? In editing @style I noticed that we don't say "absolute URI" there .. and in a few other places. We do say it in some places. It seems to me that all URIs *except* import/@location and include/@location MUST absolutely be absolute. Those two MAY be absolute or relative. I see no value in allowing relative URIs for the others. If you agree +1 it please .. I'll fix the wording then. Sanjiva.
Received on Friday, 2 July 2004 07:31:26 UTC