On May 22, 2009, at 20:21 , Mark Baker wrote:
Ah, right, I didn't realize it was related to a discussion Marcos and
I had last year;
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008OctDec/thread.html#msg50
I thought he had (somewhat grudgingly) accepted that way (the use of
relative references) forward, as IIRC, the widget: scheme idea was
dropped about that time. Has some new requirement emerged since then
that makes relative references an undesirable option?
Reading that thread I don't see a consensus emerging one way or
another, and a lot of options appear to be considered that seem to be
out of scope (or too close to the metal) for this specification. I see
some arguments around using file: that could be used, but none seem to
explain how it could be without entirely precluding other file: access
(which could potentially be needed) or minting special names (e.g. a
special file host), which strikes me as a bad idea.
Would you care to outline what specifically you had in mind?
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
