- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@attlabs.att.com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 11:59:45 -0700
- To: <XML-uri@w3.org>
> > How does it "ensure" the relative URI is not treated inappropriately? > > > > by making the effective namespace name absolute according to the current base? > > by raising a fatal error and not processing the document? > > either, depending on the application? > > something else entirely? By carefully and explicitly defining the algorithm for determining the 'base' for relative URIs when used in "xmlns" clauses of XML documents (... "when used as namespace names"). Context: I think it is the responsibility of anyone who defines a new document type or context for relative URLs to also define how it is that the base for those relative URLs should be determined. I expect that a revision of RFC 2396 will make it clear that it is possible for a given document type or application to also define ways in which relative URLs can be resolved that don't require a 'document' base, e.g., that a database could define a 'base' for each column in a database table that was defined to contain URI references, or that different classes of uses of URI references within a document might use different bases. (RFC 2557 on MHTML, for example, notes that each body part of a multipart/related might have a different 'base' associated with it.) Considering RFC 2557 as a precedent, would it be feasible to define a separate 'base' to be used for xmlns attributes in XML documents? Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Saturday, 10 June 2000 14:59:34 UTC