* M. David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-31 07:55]:
> I speaking in terms of mashups... If a feed comes from one
> source, then I would agree...  but mashups from both a
> syndication as well as an application standpoint are become the
> primary focus of EVERY major vendor. Its in this scenario that
> I see the problem of assuming the xml:base in current context
> has any value whatsoever.
> 
> Pick a planet, any planet, and my point suddenly and
> immediattelly becomes relavent.

No. That is only a problem if you just mash markup together
without taking care to preserve base URIs by adding xml:base
at the junction points as necessary.

Copying an atom:entry from one feed to another correctly requires
that you query the base URI which is in effect in the scope of
the atom:entry in the source feed, and add an xml:base attribute
to that effect to the copied atom:entry in the destination feed.
If you do this, any xml:base attributes within the copy of the
atom:entry will continue to resolve correctly.

It’s much easier to get right than copying markup without
violating namespace-wellformedness, even.

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>

Reply via email to