Re: SYMM WG comments on XBase 2nd last call

At 11:04 2000 07 03 +0200, Lloyd Rutledge wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 30 2000 Jonathan Marsh wrote:
>> Lloyd wrote:
>> > 2) We request the XML Linking WG to consider adding referential XBase
>> > functionality to the current draft, or a later version. We will not make
>> > this a requirement for using XBase with SMIL, however.

>I'd rework the syntax as:
>
><head>
>  <xml:base id="video" xml:base="/daily/video"/>
>  <xml:base id="audio" xml:base="/daily/audio"/>
></head>
><body>
>  <par>
>    <video xml:baseref="video" src="billwaves.mpg"/>
>    <audio xml:baseref="audio" src="billtalks.au"/>
>  </par>
></body>

I have concerns that adding such would complicate base which
is something pretty low-level.  Complicating issues include:

1.  if basic xml:base processing is supposed to handle this
    (and it must to work), then shouldn't "id" be in the
    xml: namespace?  And if we add an "id" in the xml: 
    namespace, aren't we opening one huge can of worms
    (this was considered several times before and rejected).

2.  for this to work, the basic xml:base processing (which
    under some scenarios may even be required as part of
    basic namespace processing) must be able to do idref/id
    resolution.  Now what if the values of the id attribute
    referenced are either non-existent or non-unique?

3.  what if someone uses xml:baseref on an xml:base element?
    This greater complicates the "up the tree" search for
    effective scoping of base URI.

4.  Since id/idref resolution is document wide, this allows
    picking up of a base from another entity within the same
    document. 

5.  What if the referenced (via xml:baseref) base is itself
    relative?  Is the absolutized or literal string used?

I think there are too many questions and complications to make
this something I want to add to xml:base at this point.

paul

Received on Monday, 3 July 2000 12:04:07 UTC