- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 22:52:56 +0100
- To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "'Sandy Gao'" <sandygao@ca.ibm.com>, "'Wolfgang Jeltsch'" <wolfgang@jeltsch.net>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
> I haven't heard anyone question the intent of the section > quoted by Sandy in the common case where two includes have > schemaLocations with exactly the same URI. > Anyway: I think there are important cases in which the > recommendation is quite clear. I agree that it's common sense to treat two includes on the same (absolutized) URI as identical. I disagree that the Recommendation makes it clear that you should do so. (It doesn't even make it clear how you should absolutize the URI, for example I've heard a serious suggestion recently that it's incorrect to take xml:base into account.) Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Received on Monday, 18 September 2006 21:53:18 UTC