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

Re: Comments on WSDL 2.0 (Core, Adjuncts, Soap 1.1 Binding) from the i18n core wg

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 15:25:43 +0900
To: "Martin Duerst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "Addison Phillips" <addison.phillips@quest.com>, "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org, public-iri@w3.org, "Norman Walsh" <Norman.Walsh@sun.com>, www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.szuxg5e4x1753t@ibm-60d333fc0ec>

Hello Martin, all,


>
>
> There is also another difference between IRIs and anyURIs as defined
> by XML Schema (by reference to XLink). It is the fact that anyURI
> allows the space character and a few other US-ASCII characters that
> are not allowed in IRIs. The reason for this is that they were
> allowed in an earlier draft of the IRI spec, on which XLink and
> XML Schema were based, but that later on there was strong feedback
> from the IETF that these characters should be disallowed.
>
> Because of this history, the IRI spec still contains a 'backdoor'
> paragraph in Section 3.1 that reads:
>
>     Systems accepting IRIs MAY also deal with the printable characters in
>     US-ASCII that are not allowed in URIs, namely "<", ">", '"', space,
>     "{", "}", "|", "\", "^", and "`", in step 2 above.  If these
>     characters are found but are not converted, then the conversion
>     SHOULD fail.  Please note that the number sign ("#"), the percent
>     sign ("%"), and the square bracket characters ("[", "]") are not part
>     of the above list and MUST NOT be converted.  Protocols and formats
>     that have used earlier definitions of IRIs including these characters
>     MAY require percent-encoding of these characters as a preprocessing
>     step to extract the actual IRI from a given field.  This
>     preprocessing MAY also be used by applications allowing the user to
>     enter an IRI.
>
> For WSDL, this gives the following choices:
> a) Allow these characters, and specify the addidional escaping as above
> b) Disallow these characters. This can easily be done with a pattern
>     facet.
> c) Allow some of the above characters but not all (XLink 1.1 allows
>     the space for the xlink:href attribute, but not other characters,
>     although '^' is used in xpointers)
> c) Choose a mixture of the above (XLink does not allow any of the
>     above characters in some other fields that are defined as IRIs,
>     such as role and arcrole).
>
> For WSDL, I think b) is the best choice, but there may be some
> feedback from implementers and users.


In the danger of being too detailed, a facet which fulfils b) (based on a  
discussion with Martin) could look like this:

<xs:simpleType name="iri">
  <xs:restriction base="xs:anyURI">
  <xs:pattern value="[^\s add the other characters from sec. 3.1 (see  
above) here]+"/>
  </xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>

Regards,

Felix

>
>
> Regards,    Martin.
>
>
>  >In any case, I agree with Martin. I would suggest text more like the
>  >following instead:
>  >
>  >--
>  >Note: The xs:anyURI type is defined so that xs:anyURI values are
>  >essentially IRIs [RFC 3987]. The conversion from xs:anyURI values to an
>  >actual URI is via an escaping procedure defined by [XLink 1.0], which  
> is
>  >identical in most respects to IRI Section 3.1. (The only difference  
> being
>  >that IRI defines handling of non-Unicode encoded byte sequences,
>  >considerations which do not affect this document directly.)
>  >--
>  >
>  >Best Regards,
>  >
>  >Addison
>  >
>  >Addison P. Phillips
>  >Globalization Architect, Quest Software
>  >Chair, W3C Internationalization Core Working Group
>  >
>  >Internationalization is not a feature.
>  >It is an architecture.
>  >
>  >> -----Original Message-----
>  >> From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org [mailto:public-i18n-core-
>  >> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh
>  >> Sent: 2005年11月1日 9:59
>  >> To: Martin Duerst; Felix Sasaki; public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
>  >> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
>  >> Subject: RE: Comments on WSDL 2.0 (Core, Adjuncts, Soap 1.1 Binding)  
> from
>  >> the i18n core wg
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> Do you have the differences at your fingertips or will I have to do  
> my
>  >> own homework? :-)  And, which do you prefer, that we list diffs or  
> stay
>  >> quiet? I expect the WG to adopt the I18N suggestions without much
>  >> dissent so having a clear position from the experts is valuable.
>  >>
>  >> -----Original Message-----
>  >> From: Martin Duerst [mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp]
>  >> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 1:08 AM
>  >> To: Felix Sasaki; Jonathan Marsh; public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
>  >> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
>  >> Subject: Re: Comments on WSDL 2.0 (Core, Adjuncts, Soap 1.1 Binding)
>  >> from the i18n core wg
>  >>
>  >> Same comment here as for XLink 1.1: I think it's not a good idea to
>  >> use the text below (provided by Felix) as such, because it easily
>  >> may give the impression that there are serious differences when
>  >> the chances for differences is actually very small. So I think it's
>  >> better to either list the differences or not say anything.
>  >>
>  >> Regards,   Martin.
>  >>
>  >> At 12:41 05/10/26, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>  >>  >
>  >>  >On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 06:32:11 +0900, Jonathan Marsh
>  >> <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
>  >>  >wrote:
>  >>  >
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> The WG had a hard time understanding your comment 3:
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> "It would be good if you could mention that although xs:anyURI
>  >> allows
>  >>  >> for IRIs (see LC74a), the mapping from IRI to URI in xs:anyURI is
>  >>  >> currently not defined in terms of IRI. This comment relates also  
> for
>  >>  >> example to the reference of xs:anyURI in sec. 2.1.2.1 and sec.
>  >> 3.1.2.1,
>  >>  >> and to the Adjuncts specification."
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> Can you provide us with more background, or perhaps precise  
> wording
>  >> for
>  >>  >> what you'd like to see?
>  >>  >
>  >>  >
>  >>  >Sorry for being unclear. The problem is as follows, and this is  
> also a
>  >>  >proposal for some text which you might integrate as a note in WSDL
>  >> 2.0:
>  >>  >
>  >>  >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.
>  >>  >
>  >>  >Is that o.k. with you?
>  >>  >
>  >>  >Best regards,
>  >>  >
>  >>  >Felix
>  >>  >
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> -----Original Message-----
>  >>  >> From: public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org
>  >>  >> [mailto:public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of  
> Felix
>  >>  >> Sasaki
>  >>  >> Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 8:54 PM
>  >>  >> To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
>  >>  >> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
>  >>  >> Subject: Comments on WSDL 2.0 (Core, Adjuncts, Soap 1.1 Binding)
>  >> from
>  >>  >> the i18n core wg
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> Dear Web Services Description Working Group,
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> With this mail I am sending you i18n comments [1] on the WSDL 2.0
>  >> WDs
>  >>  >> (Core, Adjuncts, Soap 1.1 Binding). Since I am rather late  
> (please
>  >>  >> accept
>  >>  >> my appologies), there was no time to get endorsement from the  
> i18n
>  >> core
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> wg. So please regard these comments currently as my personal
>  >> comments.
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> I am looking forward for you feedback. Best regards,
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> Felix Sasaki (team contact of the i18n core wg)
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> [1] http://www.w3.org/International/2005/10/wsdl20-review.html
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >
>  >>  >
>  >>  >
>  >>
Received on Monday, 7 November 2005 06:26:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 October 2008 10:18:50 GMT