LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for HTML-WG Archives


HTML-WG Archives

HTML-WG Archives


HTML-WG@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

HTML-WG Home

HTML-WG Home

HTML-WG  August 1995

HTML-WG August 1995

Subject:

Re: The BASE element dilemma

From:

[log in to unmask]

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Tue, 15 Aug 95 12:42:57 EDT

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (60 lines)


Ka-Ping Yee <[log in to unmask]> wrote on Tue, 15 Aug 95 11:33:04 EDT:
>The two functions of the BASE element under debate are:
>
>    1.  specification of a URL by which the original document may be
>        retrieved, as the "preferred" URL for references to the document
>
>    2.  specification of the "path" from which relative URLs in the
>        document are to be resolved
>
>My suggestion is that BASE be REQUIRED to perform function #1 while,
>if necessary, a new method be introduced to perform function #2.
>Information and support for this suggestion follows.
>
>Having previously believed that #1 was the fundamental purpose of BASE
>(and that #2 was merely an implication), but upon discovering a variety
>of differing opinions, i decided to collect some empirical data.

Ping,

I'm going to review your well-researched document during lunch in more
detail and digest it properly (pun intended), but I thought I'd remark that
according to the HTML draft going back as far as I can remember, the stated
intention of BASE is actually #2, not #1:

>Base Address: BASE
>The optional BASE element provides a base address for interpreting
>relative URLs when the document is read out of context (see section
>Hyperlinks). The value of the HREF attribute must be an absolute URI. [1]

This tends to imply #1 given a documented #2, not vice versa. My preference
would be the opposite of yours: the element referring to the base URI of a
resource (as referent for relative link resolution) should be wrapped in a
term semantically akin to "base URI", ie., BASE. I would recommend another
tag be used for bookmarks or published references to a "preferred" version
of the document, since this URI _may not necessarily be_ the base URI of
the document. I have suggested META, others have suggested LINK; regardless
of outcome, I believe we should keep BASE and the base URI in the same
element. If we do decide to separate out a current function from BASE, the
result shouldn't be contrary to the element name.

>base URI
>    an absolute URI used in combination with a relative URI to
>    determine another absolute URI. [2]

Murray

[1] http://www.w3.org/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_5.html#SEC27
[2] http://www.w3.org/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_2.html#SEC7

__________________________________________________________________
      Murray M. Altheim, Information Systems Analyst
      National Technology Transfer Center, Wheeling, West Virginia
      email: [log in to unmask]
      www:   http://ogopogo.nttc.edu/people/maltheim/maltheim.html




Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995
December 1994
November 1994
October 1994
September 1994
August 1994
July 1994

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.HEANET.IE

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager