At 08:07 AM 11/4/2004, Mike wrote:
P.S. Does anyone think I ought to allow windows path names in places where
the spec requires a URI? I'm disinclined to do it, but it does give people a
problem moving to a product that enforces the rules strictly from one that
doesn't.
The RXP parser allows Windows path names, but utters an imprecation (in the
form of a warning message) when it does so. This seems like a reasonable
compromise, though it's impossible to get this right (IMO) for every situation.
In general, however, I find that URIs internal to a stylesheet are not a
problem, since (namespace declarations aside, as they don't count) they are
almost always relative paths. Where I really miss consistency in handling
"file:" URIs is in parsers that must resolve DOCTYPE declarations or the
equivalent(s) for schemas, where sometimes you want an absolute path.
Cheers,
Wendell
======================================================================
Wendell Piez
mailto:wapiez(_at_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com
17 West Jefferson Street Direct Phone: 301/315-9635
Suite 207 Phone: 301/315-9631
Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 301/315-8285
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML
======================================================================