- From: Cohen, Aaron M <aaron.m.cohen@intel.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 10:27:37 -0700
- To: "'Jonathan Marsh'" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, "'Philipp Hoschka'" <ph@w3.org>
- Cc: Patrick Schmitz <pschmitz@microsoft.com>, "'Lloyd Rutledge'" <Lloyd.Rutledge@cwi.nl>, "'www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>, "'symm@w3.org'" <symm@w3.org>, "'Paul Grosso'" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Okay. Thanks for the info. I'm okay with all of this, and it will only requires minor changes when/if the time comes. -Aaron > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com] > Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 10:11 AM > To: 'Philipp Hoschka'; Cohen, Aaron M > Cc: Patrick Schmitz; 'Lloyd Rutledge'; > 'www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org'; 'symm@w3.org'; 'Paul Grosso' > Subject: RE: SYMM WG comments on XBase 2nd last call > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Philipp Hoschka [mailto:ph@w3.org] > > > > "Cohen, Aaron M" a écrit : > > > > > Philipp: > > > I didn't realize that you had to define what elements could > > take xbase. > > > Doesn't it work with general XML, that doesn't have a > > semantic spec or a > > > specific DTD? I've been looking at it as a sort of XML > > extension, somewhat > > > indepedent of the specific XML application language. > > > > i think you have to specify in the DTD where you can use > > xml:base; similar > > to xml:lang, and xmlns, actually - if i'm wrong, i'm sure the > > xml linking > > folks > > will correct me > > Yes, if you use a DTD for validation. If your spec contains > a normative DTD > it would be nice to have xml:base allowed on all elements (similarly > xml:space and xml:lang if you don't provide specific > restrictions on them). > > > > But if we do need to specify, we can certainly just say > > that it's valid > > > (although not necessarily meaningful) on all SML elements. > > > > i guess so - i would hope that it is meaningful, though it > > may not be useful, > > > > but that's another issue - quickly checking the draft, it > > seems that xml:base > > *is* actually meaningful wherever you chose to put it > > The intent is that xml:base can appear on any element in well-formed > documents. If you want to restrict that further, you can by making a > normative DTD. > > But the bigger issue for SMIL support of xml:base is to > declare in the SMIL > draft which attributes/content represents URIs (presumeably > you already do > this), and that these URIs are interpreted according to XML Base. For > instance, you might add something like I did in XInclude. See > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2000/07/WD-xinclude-20000705#IDwuAq1 > (specificallly the first 2 paragraphs, the list, and the > following sentence) > which specifies how URIs are treated in regards to the I18N > character model > and XML Base. > >
Received on Friday, 7 July 2000 13:27:49 UTC