W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-resource-access@w3.org > September 2009

Re: Issue 7426 (URI vs IRI) (was Action 97)

From: ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 08:40:19 -0700
Message-ID: <4AA67AE3.2050406@oracle.com>
To: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
CC: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
The October 28, 2004 version of the XML Schema Datatypes spec defines 
the anyURI datatype
only in terms of URI.  There is no mention on IRI.  This is the latest 
"official" spec.

I notice that in later, unofficial, versions of the spec, URI has been 
changed to IRI.

All the best, Ashok


Doug Davis wrote:
>
> What does this mean for the use of the xs:anyURI schema type?
>
> thanks
> -Doug
> ______________________________________________________
> STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
> (919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
> The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.
>
>
> *Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>*
> Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
>
> 09/08/2009 10:20 AM
>
> 	
> To
> 	public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	Issue 7426 (URI vs IRI) (was Action 97)
>
>
>
> 	
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
> After reading the status or URI/IR support in the specification linked to
> ours, it turns out that they all support IRIs apart from WSDL 1.0 
> which is
> seilent on the subject.
> So we should do the following:
>
> In all our spec, replace URI by IRI, and any reference to RFC3986 to
> RFC3987.
> Cheers,
>
> -- 
> Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.
>
>         ~~Yves
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 8 September 2009 15:42:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:18:13 GMT