RE: Internet draft submission: draft-walsh-tobin-hrri-00

I have some minor comments that we can keep for
the next draft/RFC and then I have a question (below). 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Norman Walsh
> Sent: Wednesday, 2007 April 25 11:49
> To: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org; Richard Tobin
> Subject: Internet draft submission: draft-walsh-tobin-hrri-00
> 
> Attached, please find a document submitted for publication as
> an Internet Draft. For your convenience, you will also find a copy
> of it on the web at:

fwiw, it still says:

  such as delimiters and a few ASCII characters

whereas Richard had suggested

  such as delimiters and a few other ASCII characters

in section 2 (Motivation).

---

Richard had also suggestion (in section 2) changing

  converting that string to an IRI

to

  converting that string to a URI or IRI

---

I see we now first mention HRRI in section 3 after the bullet
points (in fact, in a sentence about what is NOT an HRRI).

I would prefer to see us first mention it at the beginning
of section 3, to wit:

  A Human Readable Resource Identifier (HRRI) is a sequence...

=========

I know we discussed this, but now I'm confused.

Why don't we talk about percent-encoding percents?

We say "%%%" is an invalid HRRI.  Is "ab%d" an invalid HHRI?
If not, then don't we need to percent-encode the %?

And if we are percent-encoding percents, in what way is "%%%" 
an invalid HRRI?  Shouldn't one percent-encode the percents thereby 
producing a valid IRI?

paul

Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 17:14:33 UTC