xml-dev - Re: [xml-dev] Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?

Re: [xml-dev] Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

To: Michael Kay <michael.h.kay@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 09:16:11 -0500
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
In-reply-to: <000001c3d5f0$21652550$6401a8c0@pcukmka>
References: <p06010201bc22855ac223@[192.168.254.4]> <000001c3d5f0$21652550$6401a8c0@pcukmka>
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

Michael Kay scripsit:

> I will never be surprised to find yet more horrors in RFC 2396, but I
> certainly didn't expect anyone to tell me that the word "relative" is
> not being used as an adjective to qualify the noun "URI".

It isn't.  Relative URLs are one kind of URI reference.  "Relative URI"
is not a standardized term.

-- 
Real FORTRAN programmers can program FORTRAN    John Cowan
in any language.  --Allen Brown                 jcowan@reutershealth.com

Follow-Ups:
- RE: [xml-dev] Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
  - From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@ntlworld.com>

References:
- Re: [xml-dev] Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
  - From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- RE: [xml-dev] Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
  - From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@ntlworld.com>

Prev by Date: Re: [xml-dev] Any hints on characterizing memory requirements of XML querystatements?
Next by Date: RE: [xml-dev] Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
Previous by thread: RE: [xml-dev] Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
Next by thread: RE: [xml-dev] Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread