Bill de hÓra wrote:
What is implied by our references appears to be it xml:base either evaluates to all the children under which it's declared or the behavior is undefined because the spec didn't define xml:base usage.
So I guess my question is - how is scoping xml:base to not apply within atom:content where type is xhtml not profiling XML Base?
If were using XHTML2, I'd agree with you. The XHTML1 family doesn't use xml:base. A vocabularly must identify which of its elements are subject to xml:base processing. For example, "XLink normatively references XML Base for interpretation of relative URI references in xlink:href attribute".
I suppose the case could be made that we're defining our own little language here, so we are within our rights. Not a very interesting question, because xml:base seems to create problems for aggregated HTML displays. A huge bug, IMHO.
Robert Sayre
