Re: [office] relative URLs [was: Action Items for todays meeting]

Paul, All

Paul Grosso wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand all this, but I'm concerned that we
> might be reinventing the wheel using non-standard parts.
> 
> RFC 2396 [1] and recent internet, XML, and web architecture in
> general (e.g., XML Base [2]) defines what relative URI references
> mean and how to write them.  I'm not sure we need to hide the
> relative reference hierarchy in the fragment identifier (and
> fragment identifiers belong to MIME types, so we can only define
> a new fragment identifier if we are registering a new MIME type).
> 
> Insofar as we're talking about relative URI references, I think we
> should be following the standards.
> 
> I'm not up to speed on just what a package is in OpenOffice, but
> insofar as there are precedents, we should use them.
> 
> Perhaps we can discuss this on the call today.

I agree that we should discuss this in the con call today. It might be 
interesting for our discussions how RFC 296 specifies the base URI:

5.1.2. Base URI from the Encapsulating Entity

    If no base URI is embedded, the base URI of a document is defined by
    the document's retrieval context.  For a document that is enclosed
    within another entity (such as a message or another document), the
    retrieval context is that entity; thus, the default base URI of the
    document is the base URI of the entity in which the document is
    encapsulated.

Michael