[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Added proposal to make xml:base generally applicable

To: Tim Bray <tbray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Added proposal to make xml:base generally applicable
From: Sam Ruby <rubys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:32:03 -0500
Cc: Atom-Syntax Syntax <atom-syntax@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-id: <atom-syntax.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <>
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

Tim Bray wrote:

I just posted http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/XmlBaseEverywhere (linked from http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/FormatSpecDraft). I hope it's not controversial. If it is, discussion here please. -Tim

If xml base is everywhere, then how should the following line in my atom feed be interpreted?

<issued>2004-02-26T09:15:36-05:00</issued>

It seems to me that the spec needs to identify the places where a URI is expected - either by enumeration (link/@href, id, url) or by rule (the media type on title, summary, and content may define a data type which contains relative uris).

- Sam Ruby

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Added proposal to make xml:base generally applicable
  - From: James Aylett

References:
- Added proposal to make xml:base generally applicable
  - From: Tim Bray

Prev by Date: Re: <id> and <link> are broken!
Next by Date: Re: PaceLinkRelMechanism
Previous by thread: Re: Added proposal to make xml:base generally applicable
Next by thread: Re: Added proposal to make xml:base generally applicable
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread