[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: DOCBOOK: xml:base
At 02:12 2002 11 20 -0800, Bob Stayton wrote: >On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 05:34:10PM -0600, Paul Grosso wrote: >> Having xml:base is >> only useful if there are relative URIs within scope, so >> it's important to answer just what values are supposed to >> be affected by xml:base. >> >> So just what things in DocBook are affected by xml:base? >> >> Does xml:base affect the value of the fileref attribute? >> What about ulink's url attribute? They are both just CDATA, >> so how is an application supposed to know whether they should >> be affected? Yet users will certainly expect them to be. I'm okay with adding xml:base, but I still need to explore just what it's supposed to mean to whom. >Yes, fileref and ulink's url attribute would be affected, >if they are relative references. Don't we need to say that then? I would think so, but your next statement seems to imply you don't this so. >It shouldn't matter how a reference is specified. >An application doesn't know an attribute is an external file >reference until it is asked to open it up. It seems you have some processing model in mind, but I'm not understanding it. By what do you mean application in this case? Who is asking the application to open it up? And whatever the answer, how does this thing know a given string is an external file reference? I think the way xml:base is defined to work (both by the XML Base spec and the Infoset) is to affect URI references within the document's infoset. But the fileref and url attributes are only attributes within the infoset, not URI references. >Any such lookup triggered from within the context of an xml:base >value should take the containing xml:base into account. I don't understand how this statement translates into infosets. There seems like too much magic--or "do what I want"--going on here. I don't see how xml:base can work unless we say how to apply it. I think at least we need to say which DocBook attributes are considered to be URI references for the purposes of xml:base processing. >If the application is generating XML output, it should pass >the xml:base value through so that downstream processors >such as an FO processor can use it when it opens the file. What application here? Are you talking about an XSLT processor processing an XSL stylesheet producing an FO result tree? In what way should xml:base be passed? As an attribute? Attributes in an XSLT result tree are actively placed into the result tree under the direction of the XSL stylesheet. Nothing special about xml:base. By the way, I also notice that the XML Base spec says: The deployment of XML Base is through normative reference by new specifications, for example XLink and the XML Infoset. Applications and specifications built upon these new technologies will natively support XML Base. The behavior of xml:base attributes in applications based on specifications that do not have direct or indirect normative reference to XML Base is undefined. Given that the XSL spec doesn't say anything about XML Base (and it is not based on the Infoset), the behavior of xml:base attributes in XSL is undefined. paul
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC