[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I'm puzzled by this response.
>
> Actually if the schema doesn't support xml:base all that
> means is that
> the document is invalid. You can still use it despite the
> validity error
Most people who go to the trouble of validating a document regard it as a
fatal error if the document is invalid. If you don't care about validity
errors, you probably don't need a schema in the first place, in which case
the problem doesn't arise. So I'm not sure what point you are trying to make
here.
> SAX parsers normally
> don't support it [xml:base] as far as I know.
What would it mean for a SAX parser to support xml:base? The only impact of
xml:base is to change the base URI of elements, and thus to change the way
in which relative URIs in the content are resolved. But SAX doesn't report
the base URI of an element, and doesn't attempt to resolve any relative URIs
in the content. It leaves that entirely to the application.
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
|
