Re: Added proposal to make xml:base generally applicable

[James Aylett <james@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 08:56:10AM -0800, Tim Bray wrote:

> >>Agreed.  However, I think that enumeration would make this clearer and
> >>simpler.
> >
> >We need to enumerate which elements have content of type URI, agreed.
> 
> I'm not sure.  My proposed wording is "XML Base [REC-xmlbase-20010627] 
> processing MUST be applied to any relative URI reference which appears 
> where Atom specifies a URI".  I.e., everywhere that Atom says "put a 
> URI here" you just know that if the URI is relative and if there's an 
> xml:base in scope, then it applies.  It seems like bad spec design to 
> have to put the information about the URI-ness of protocol elements in 
> two places.

I didn't mean to suggest redundant information - I'm in favour of
saying "everywhere you see data of type URI in Atom, do XML base
processing", and then impart which things will have data of type
URI. That's semantically equivalent to an enumeration, but not
syntactically so - I should have been more clear, sorry.

James

-- 
/--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
  James Aylett                                                  xapian.org
  james@xxxxxxxxxxxx                               uncertaintydivision.org