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

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

From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 15:05:01 -0400 (EDT)
To: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0909081504040.9314@wnl.j3.bet>
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009, Doug Davis wrote:

> What does this mean for the use of the xs:anyURI schema type?

Nothing as it was already including the IRI definition. (In fact, it's the 
use of xs:anyURI that triggered this issue).

>
> 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 19:11:00 GMT

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