[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] xml:base and fragments
- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- To: "Andrew S. Townley" <ast@atownley.org>
- Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 22:16:48 +0100
>
> Not sure I’m 100% following you here. Forgive me for typing and thinking, but that way you can spot anything I’m doing wrong as I do it… ;)
>
> A URI is an identifier for a resource. A reference to the URI is the byte stream content of the URI itself, right?
I didn't use the term "reference to the URI". I think you probably misunderstood the term "URI Reference". This is the term used in RFC 3986 to mean either a "URI" or a "relative reference". In normal everyday conversation most people call these "absolute URI" and "relative URI" respectively, but those terms are from older specs. RFC 3986 decided that a "relative URI" is not a URI at all, it is (in effect) an abbreviation of a URI.
>
> According to 4.4, (the part you summarized):
>
> When a same-document reference is dereferenced for a retrieval
> action, the target of that reference is defined to be within the same
> entity (representation, document, or message) as the reference;
> therefore, a dereference should not result in a new retrieval action.
>
> So when byte stream A (the base URI) is identical to byte stream B (some other URI reference), then we have the “same-document” reference (aside from any fragment component).
No, I think you've gone off at a complete tangent here.
Michael Kay
Saxonica
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]