James Cerra wrote:
I'd solve it in the same manner that XML namespaces solved the multiple
context
problem: by providing a default context as well as explicitly named contexts.
The default context works the same way as xml:base or the the default xmlns
works now. Explicit contexts would
James Cerra wrote:
xml:base is a broken specification. At the simplest, it's just a lame attempt
at abbreviating strings. However, it solves that problem in the worst
possible manner. As the RDF serializations show, what is needed is a
name/value pair simular to entities or xml namespaces.
Sjoerd Visscher,
xml:base is a broken specification. At the simplest, it's just a lame
attempt at abbreviating strings. However, it solves that problem in the
worst possible manner. As the RDF serializations show, what is needed is
a name/value pair simular to entities or xml
* James Cerra [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-07-21 05:00]:
Sjoerd Visscher,
That's because it is not an attempt at abbreviating strings,
but to preserve the meaning of relative URIs, when content is
used outside of its original context.
Same thing. You are framing the question in a manner
On Wednesday, July 20, 2005, at 10:22 PM, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* James Cerra [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-07-21 05:00]:
Sjoerd Visscher,
That's because it is not an attempt at abbreviating strings,
but to preserve the meaning of relative URIs, when content is
used outside of its original context.
