Hi, On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Julian Reschke <[email protected]> wrote: > I think this means we need a variant of getOakPath() that doesn't make the > path absolute. Any preferences about whether this should be a flag or a new > method?
I'd ideally keep these tasks clearly separate. Have a PathMapper that only takes care of mapping namespace prefixes and URIs to respective Oak prefixes, and a PathResolver that takes such a mapped path and resolves it against a given context. BR, Jukka Zitting
