- From: <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 13:49:38 -0400
- To: "Curt Arnold" <carnold@houston.rr.com>
- cc: "Paul Grosso" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>, www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
Shouldn't xml:base just trackl what the Infoset already does with base URIs? A base URI, however it's asserted, is inherited downward until a new one is asserted. Whether that assertion reflects physical division of data (entity) or logical (xml:base), it's still a single value and a single behavior. At least, that's what I would expect to see. Note that the Infoset and DOM have to agree upon whether base URIs are early-binding or late-binding. This doesn't matter for a static parse; it does matter if the Infoset is edited. Namespaces were deemed to be early-binding; once a node's identity is set it may not be reset, and the NS URI is considered part of that identity. The primary justification for that decision -- that DOMs may subclass nodes based on the namespace they belong to -- doesn't interact with base URI _UNLESS_ someone takes the relative-namespace-declaration monstrosity back off the table. The base URI of a synthetic document is an open question. Infoset says it's a peripheral property avainable "if known", but doesn't say how to determine whether it's known. I suspect the DOM would want to say that this is a write-once property (ie, you can assert it once during document initialization but never change it thereafter), and that it defaults to null so we can recognize unknown as a distinct case. > If you ran a document with external entities through an XSLT > processor with even a simple copy transform, the resulting document would > have lost all the entity boundaries. That's as expected. If you run XSLT you're generating a new document based on data retreived from the source material. There's no particular reason the new doc _should_ retain its source context, unless you explicitly create xml:base declarations to assert that context.(Wasn't being able to do so when necessary one of the motivations behind xml:base's creation?)
Received on Friday, 14 July 2000 13:49:53 UTC