W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: Comments from the I18N Core WG on XLink 1.1

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 15:21:38 +0900
Message-Id: <>
To: "Felix Sasaki" <fsasaki@w3.org>, "Norman Walsh" <Norman.Walsh@sun.com>
Cc: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>

Hello Felix,

Please excuse my ignorance, but could you explain the
differences between the XML Schema (i.e. XLink) escaping
procedure and the IRI escaping procedure?

Once I understand what differences you are after, my
guess is that I'll ask you to be more specific in the
note (noting differences when there are minimal without
pointing out that they are minimal runs the danger of
creating needless confusion).

Regards,   Martin.

At 13:29 05/10/27, Felix Sasaki wrote:
 >Hello Norm,
 >>> 10 Appendix C
 >>> The hrefTypein the XML Schema and the href.att pattern in the RELAX NG
 >>> schema are defined in terms of xs:anyURI. Please add a note that
 >>> anyURI in its current version does not support the escaping rules of
 >>> RFC 3987.
 >> Hmm. I thought that was addressed in the XML Schema definition of
 >> xs:anyURI.
 >We discussed this at the i18n core call this week. Would you mind to add a
 >health warning to the spec, in a note like this:
 >xs:anyURI defines a mapping from xs:anyURI values to URIs via an URI
 >reference escaping
 >procedure. In the current version of XML Schema 2, this procedure is
 >defined in terms of
 >XLink 1.0, and does not reply on the escaping procedure from RFC 3987
 >(IRI, sec. 3.1).
 >Hence, relying on xs:anyURI might generate escaped URIs which are
 >different from IRI
 >based escaped URIs.
Received on Friday, 28 October 2005 06:24:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:23:00 UTC