DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40862>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40862 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-02 16:45 ------- (In reply to comment #0) > The file C:/Documents and Settings/Daniel/Desktop/shape/aspect.svg doesn't > exist on my system, hence I removed the attribute referencing this file from > the SVG file (gradient color filling) and everything worked out perfect, i.e. > the image with gradient color is rendered. (Attribute: > xml:base="file:/C:/Documents and Settings/Daniel/Desktop/shape/aspect.svg" > inside the "svg" tag on the top of the file.) So the xml:base attribute is used to identify the base URI to resolve relative URL's against. To be honest it is a little unclear to me what should happen for a href that consists only of a fragment identifier however reading section 4.2 of http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt leads me to believe that Batik's behavior is in error. Any other opinions? Are we really supposed to tread just fragment identifiers as a special case? At the very least it is poor form to set xml:base to an 'incorrect' value, although it is possible that in this case it should work. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
