J.Pietschmann wrote: > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > NOTE: there is no official indication on how the file: URI should be > > addressed, but all these > > > > file:/file > > file://file > > file:///file > > > > are all valid URIs and should point to the same file (at least, this was > > my understanding). > > Your understanding is wrong. Only the last is a valid URI. > The RFC for this appears to be > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt > and some predecessors. > > > It could be possible to add > > > > file:file > > > > to indicate a relative location. > > This is wrong too. An URI starting with an URI scheme > identificator (like file:) is *always* an absolute URI. > This: > /file > is an *relative* URI, despite being an *absolute* path. > > > This is normally achieved by avoiding > > to indicate the protocol (such as in "file"), but since we need a > > protocol to identify the handler, "file:file" might just be a way to > > encode relativity in file positioning. > > A relative URI is resolved against a base URI, which sepcifies > the URI scheme. If your base URI is a file URL, *all* relative > URIs encountered are resolved to files. You can't have a base > HTTP URI and suddenly have a relative URI point to a file. > > Well, hope this helps: > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=102027988321347&w=2 > Re: changed behaviour with source resolving
As part of that earlier thread i added some corrections to Cocoon xdocs to encourage proper use of file: URLs. Those docs have not yet made it to the website, so start at build/cocoon/docs/faq/faq-sitemap.html#faq-12 --David --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
