- From: David Lee <dlee@calldei.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:19:40 -0600
- To: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Cool...shame on me for believing the java app docs Thanks On Dec 29, 2008, at 9:16 PM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > "David A. Lee" <dlee@calldei.com> writes: >> Hence I think the spec needs to be changed to specify that >> resolution is NOT against the parent's base URI but rather against >> the parent's base URI with the final path component removed. > > That's the way RFC 2396 defines the process of resolving a relative- > path > reference against the current base URI. See, for example, item 6.a in > section 5.2 of RFC 2396. > > If we said that too, then you'd lose two path segments... > > Be seeing you, > norm > > -- > Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Everything we love, no doubt, will > pass > http://nwalsh.com/ | away, perhaps tomorrow, perhaps a > | thousand years hence. Neither it nor > | our love for it is any the less > | valuable for that reason.--John > Passmore
Received on Tuesday, 30 December 2008 22:22:31 UTC