Sam Ruby wrote:
Sjoerd Visscher wrote:
Not quite, it is a nitpick, but I think the source of our disagreement.
Resolution is the procedure of making absolute paths from relative
paths. So the link resolves to <http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/>.
But this is equal (string-equal) to the base URI, so this is a
same-document reference.
In the sentence above, you refer to "the base URI". I would interpret
that as "the base URI of the document", not "the base URI of the element".
It has to the base URI of the element, otherwise links can change
meaning when you XInclude them in another document.
The problematic values are the ones that when resolved are the same as
the base URI (ignoring the fragment). In this case even <link
href="http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/"/> would be problematic.
My reading of this statement is that your feed also contains a
problematic link. Issuing warnings on what is unambiguously a fully
qualified URI and on your usage are things I would rather avoid.
Why?
--
Sjoerd Visscher
http://w3future.com/weblog/
