- From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:49:38 -0400
- To: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
- CC: xml-uri@w3.org
Jonathan Borden wrote: > I suppose the real question is what rules ought be applied to transform > a relative uri into an absolute uri: RFC 2396 defines them once and for all, except that there is an extension mechanism for things like the HTML BASE element or the proposed xml:base. Every Web resource has a base URI, which by default is the URI of the document itself. > a) ought the parent element's namespace be used as the base uri? No, unless the base URI has been changed to the parent element's namespace using one of the escape mechanisms. > b) or rather does one consider the document *location* uri the base uri? Yes, usually. > > So you write your application in terms of namespace names which are > absolute > > URIs, possibly with fragment-ids as well, and you depend on absolutizing > > to match with namespace declarations that are relative URI references. > > > > We need to properly define the process of absolutizing. See http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt, which spells it out in detail. -- Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)
Received on Tuesday, 16 May 2000 14:49:58 UTC