I haven't looked in detail at how IE does on the xml:base comformance tests, since the current beta has no support for xml:base. In light of that fact, I'm glad we failed outright instead of halfway; halfway would have been weird :).
We're actually implementing xml:base support right now (and in the process, fixing the relative URL issue that Sam Ruby pointed out in our normalization format), so we'll be broken on those conformance tests for while. The fix won't make it out in the next public release, but it should make the one after that. I'll let you know how we do on those tests when the code is done. Sean -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Holderness Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:24 PM To: Atom Syntax Subject: Re: Does xml:base apply to type="html" content? Sean Lyndersay wrote: > In my own case (IE7) case, this isn't that big a deal because we have > to grovel in HTML for many other reasons, but I suspect it'd be pain > for other clients. Looking at the results of the Atom XmlBaseConformanceTests [1] mosts of the clients tested seemed capable of handling relative references inside HTML to some extent. Even the ones that don't necessarily pass all the tests at least get enough right to suggest that they're on the right track. IE7 is actually one of the few clients that I would consider to have failed outright. Is the latest beta any better at handling xml:base or do these problems still exist? Regards James [1] http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/XmlBaseConformanceTests
