Hi Suzanne,
The base URI is intended to be the base URI for the document that is being
used to provide the namespace bindings. It's only interesting in XSLT
processing, so you can just return an empty string.
Dave
Dear Folks,
All I see in the documentation about what this is supposed to be
is the 'base URI for the Resolver'. huh? What exactly does this mean? Is
this supposed to be the first namespaceURI on the document element, or
what? Is there an assumption that URIs are built on top of
Hi Mark,
It's up to you. I'm happy to push to change the conformance test, since it
really ought to be done. But, if you think there's some value in
supporting legacy documents, then send a patch with the change, or new
copies of the XalanParsedURI files.
Thanks!
Dave
Beat me to it :)
I can implement it this way if required.
Mark
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 21 March 2003 06:09
> To: xalan-c-users@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: Upcoming Xalan-C++ 1.5 release
>
>
> From C.2 Abnormal Examples :
> ..
>From C.2 Abnormal Examples :
...
"Some parsers allow the scheme name to be present
in a relative URI if it is the same as the base
URI scheme. This is considered to be a
loophole in prior specifications of partial URI
[RFC1630]. Its use should be avoided.
http:g= http:g
Hi Mark,
Thanks -- I didn't have any problems applyting the patch. I had to make a
few minor changes to get the code to compile on VC6, which does not support
initialization in the class definition, so you might want to take a quick
look at the result, once I check it in.
One problem: we now
