ISSUE: relative URIs in 'linkuri'

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

Ref:  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cgmo-webcgm/200509/msg00093.html
Comments:  20
==========

ISSUE:  how are relative URIs in 'linkuri' resolved?

DISCUSSION:  Dieter writes,
"something should be added to say that xcfurls can be relative but can also 
be absolute. Also, we need to make a comment about relative URLs found in 
linkURIs then, the processing there is different, if I remember 
correctly.There it is relative to the container document I think."

The first sentence is strictly editorial.  The second is not so 
straightforward.  A 'linkuri' could occur:
-- in a WebCGM instance;
-- in DOM script;
-- in XCF instance.

As I understand it, the container document would be the WebCGM, a HTML/JS 
file, the XML file of the XCF.  I don't think we want the relative URI of a 
'linkuri' to resolve to the container document.  For example, load this CGM

Container:  http://www.example.org/webcgm/myCGM.cgm
linkuri:  #another-obj-in-this-pic

Then we edit the DOM of that already-loaded WebCGM, with this DOM script, 
to change that linkuri...

Container:  http://www.example.org/domScripts/myDOMtest.html
linkuri:  #a-third-obj-in-this-pic

I don't think we want the linkuri to all of a sudden be relative to 
myDOMtest.html.  Or am I misunderstanding the meaning of "container 
document"?  I think we want something like ... relative URI in 'linkuri' 
resolves relative to the WebCGM "that contains it".  I quoted the latter 
because I'm not quite sure the right way to express it.  But ... if the 
'linkuri' is in a WebCGM, no problem.  If it is in DOM script or XCF ... 
well, the 'linkuri' in a sense is really contained in the WebCGM, and those 
(DOM script / XCF) are just editing directives that are being applied, to 
change the 'linkuri' value in the WebCGM.

RECOMMENDATION:  relative URI in 'linkuri' resolves relative to the WebCGM 
"that contains it".

Discussion?  (Suggestions for the best way to say it?)

Regards,
-Lofton.