Subject: RE: [xsl] Windows URLs From: "Passin, Tom" <tpassin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:02:06 -0500 |
> From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > This doesn't actually address the UNC question, but I'm pretty sure that > conclusion when we last discussed it on the list was that the correct form > (i.e. the one most likely to work) was file:////server/file/name - yes, > four > slashes. This might seem logical, but it didn't work on Firefox when I tried it. Putting in *five* forward slashes did! My guess is that the thinking was to start at the local host, which would be the three slashes, then put in two more to let that host find the target via UNC. Of course, there is no particular reason why a processor should be expected to find a UNC address at all, even though it can be handy on occasion. In any event, it doesn't look like there will be uniformity of syntax for file: urls any time soon, even without handling of UNC addresses. > Michael Kay > http://www.saxonica.com/ > > 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. I've changed my mind about this many times. Today, I think it better not to do it, unless you plan to treat *nix file names the same way, too, which seems unlikely. Cheers, Tom P
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Windows URLs, Pawson, David | Thread | [xsl] XSLT - update attribute with , Ann Marie Rubin |
Re: [xsl] Transforming XML 'on-the-, Joseph Dane | Date | Re: [xsl] Conditional extraction of, Bryan Rasmussen |
Month |