Re: Added proposal to make xml:base generally applicable

[Sam Ruby <rubys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

James Aylett wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 07:32:03AM -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> > 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>
>
> What's the data type of the contents of <issued/>? A W3CDTF (from
> memory); xml base doesn't apply to this type.

Agreed.  However, I think that enumeration would make this clearer and 
simpler.

> > 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).
>
> I think we'd need to specify which parts of the Atom vocabulary are
> URIs in the spec (and in the schema)? (Which is enumeration.) And then
> define that the base URI for <content/> data is evaluated using XML
> base processing on the <content/> element. (Which is by rule.) So
> "both". Which is possibly what you meant to say.

It is not simply content, but also title and summary.

> I don't have time to look up the specs, but are we going to get nasty
> clashes with BASE processing in HTML, or will the above fit with it
> nicely?

This also needs to be spelled out.

> James