- From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 10:04:14 -0400 (EDT)
- To: elharo@metalab.unc.edu (Elliotte Rusty Harold)
- Cc: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org, xml-dev@lists.xml.org, xom-interest@lists.ibiblio.org
Elliotte Rusty Harold scripsit: > 2. the base URI of the element's parent element within the document > or external entity, if one exists, otherwise [snip] > Clearly, point 2 applies. Unfortunately the English is unclear. Does it mean: > > A. the base URI of the element's parent element within the *same* > entity, whether that entity is a document entity or external entity > > B. the base URI of the element's parent element whether the element > comes from the document entity or an external entity I think clearly A is meant, otherwise there would be no point in mentioning entities at all in point 2. A clearer wording would be "document entity or external entity" rather than "document or external entity". See .sig below for a terse explication of this kind of reasoning. -- John Cowan jcowan@reutershealth.com www.reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan "The exception proves the rule." Dimbulbs think: "Your counterexample proves my theory." Latin students think "'Probat' means 'tests': the exception puts the rule to the proof." But legal historians know it means "Evidence for an exception is evidence of the existence of a rule in cases not excepted from."
Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 10:05:13 UTC