I understood relative in exactly the same
sense as it’s used in 2396. If you have a relative reference “bar”
and a base XRI “xri:@foo”, how to you convert the relative
reference into the fully qualified XRI “xri:@foo/bar”? That’s
the question I’m attempting to answer. Is that not what you have in mind
Gabe?
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Wachob, Gabe
[mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003
1:48 PM
To:
''
Subject: [xri-editors]
Interpretation of "relative XRIs"
I still think I don't quite follow
the rules w/r/t to "relative" XRIs.
Is it fair to say that a relative
XRI is simply one that doesn't specify the naming authority in which it is
defined? So, for example, the way to "resolve" a relative XRI is
simply to have a "default" name authority in your resolver?
If so, how is this different from
the * GCS
I'm still concerned about our use of
"relative" in this case. This is different from "relative"
in the URI sense, I think, in that, in 2396land, a relative URI is relative to
the context in which it is presented (ie an HTML file, a MIME wrapper, etc, or
in a document with XML Base data). We mean something else by
"relative" - its not relative to the context in which the relative XRI
is presented - its relative to the client resolver!
If this is true, I would really like
to not call this "relative", or at least call it
"client-relative" or something more specific.
On the other hand, if I'm still not
getting relativity, it could use more description (and I know its marked
as being on Dave's plate to describe).
-Gabe
