Quoting Tim Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Aug 4, 2005, at 11:21 PM, David Powell wrote: > > > We say that Simple Extension Elements are not language sensitive, but > > we don't say that Simple Extension constructs aren't affected by > > xml:base. I think that the implication is that they are not, but it > > is not very explicit: > > They *are* affected by xml:base. xml:base establishes the base URI > for wherever it's in-scope, with a specific callout to RFC3986 for > the semantics. Anytime you see something that you know is a relative > URI reference, you have to absolutize it using the base URI, and the > base URI is what xml:base says it is. -Tim
Yes, I understand, but I disagree. xml:base only affects things that are designated to be URI references. I wouldn't expect <atom:title>/index.html</atom:title> to get resolved as a URI, because atom:title isn't defined to be a URIRef. Neither are Simple Extension Elements. There is a layering. Implementors of draft-ietf-atompub-format-10 can never know that an arbitrary Simple Extension Element's value is a URI reference, so it can never be treated as one; the value is clearly stated to be a language-insensitive string, not a URIRef, therefore xml:base has no effect. Specifications for extensions may declare that the string value should be interpretted by applications as being a URI (or a date, or an integer, or whatever), but we are at a different layer now, the xml:base of the element that the property was declared is as irrelevent as its namespace-prefix. -- Dave
