/ Bill de hÃra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: | Aside from what Anne said, I just scanned the XML Base spec and can't | find anything scope wrt to child elements and attributes. In | particular this (quoted previously here): | | [[[ | The deployment of XML Base is through normative reference by new | specifications, for example XLink and the XML Infoset. Applications | and specifications built upon these new technologies will natively | support XML Base. The behavior of xml:base attributes in applications | based on specifications that do not have direct or indirect normative | reference to XML Base is undefined. | ]]] | | had nothing to say about scope. 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?
That would seem really strange to me. The xml:base attribute on an
ancestor of atom:content changes the [base uri] property in the
infoset. Down inside atom:content, suppose you find an html:div; what
is its base URI? To answer that, you look for the applicable [base
uri] property. I don't know any other way to do it.
I suppose we could say that the base URI for atom:content is undefined
but that seems odd too. It strikes me that that might be tricky too.
Do we say that elements put in atom:content SHOULD use absolute URIs.
We probably, uhm, should :-)
Be seeing you,
norm
--
Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | It is good to have an end to journey
http://nwalsh.com/ | toward; but it is the journey that
| matters, in the end.--Ursula K. LeGuin
pgpH89KWWqJBn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
