[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: System identifiers and base URIs

  • From: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>
  • To: xml-dev@x...
  • Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:41:03 -0400

jay sachs
/ Jay Sachs <jay@a...> was heard to say:
| Norman Walsh wrote:
| > / Jay Sachs <jay@a...> was heard to say:
| > [...]
| > | An
| > | EntityResolver can (and probably should be required to) set the systemId
| > | of the returned InputSource. If the systemId is the same as the URI
| > | being "resolved", there is no redirection. If this is different, a
| > | redirection has occurred.
| > 
| > I certainly agree that an entity resolver can return any resource it
| > wants, and that the entity resolver is free to choose to inform the
| > application that the system identifier is anything it wants. (I'll
| > even argue that it should be allowed to return null if it wants, that
| > case is carefully spelled out in RFC2396.)
| 
| To be explicit here: a "null" systemId on the returned InputSource would
| mean that 5.1.2 applies, and the URI is that of the enclosing context?
| Or that no redirection had occurred? Or do you mean that section 5.1.4
| applies and it's now up to the application? I suspect the first (section
| 5.1.2) is more conforming to the RFC.

I hadn't really considered that case very carefully. I'd be happy with
either an interpretation based on 5.1.2 (which would effectively make
the included entity "transparent" from a URI-perspective) or 5.1.4
which would leave it undefined. But I don't think the 5.1.2
interpretation would allow an entity resolver to return null when it
was parsing an XML DTD without violating the spirit of the XML 1.0 REC
as I understand it. (Since nested entities are supposed to be resolved
relative to the entitities that contain them.)

| > The case that I am specifically seeking community agreement on is the
| > second: if the URI returned in the systemIdentifier property of the
| > InputSource returned by the entityResolver is not the same sas the
| > systemIdentifier that was passed in, "redirection" has occurred (in
| > the RFC2396 sense) and subsequent relative URIs are relative to that
| > location.
| 
| I'd concur that the best (only?) way to define "redirection" when
| dealing with EntityResolvers and InputSources is in the difference
| between systemIds.

And we agree that this *is* redirection *in the RFC2396 sense*. Yes?

| > I gather, Jay, that you've reconsidered and now believe that it should
| > be http://moo.goo/somefile.ent. Is that right?
| 
| Given that the systemId was changed, yes: a redirection has occurred,
| and the resulting URI is now http://moo.goo/somefile.net.

Good! :-)

Is there anyone reading this thread who disagrees?

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman.Walsh@E... | It is a general error to imagine the
XML Technology Center     | loudest complainers for the public to be
Sun Microsystems, Inc.    | the most anxious for its welfare.--Edmund
                          | Burke, 1769

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.