W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > March 2008

Re: Transition Request: (2nd) PER Request for XML Base Second Edition

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 16:11:54 +0100
Message-ID: <1859355542.20080317161154@w3.org>
To: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Cc: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>, <timbl@w3.org>, <steve@w3.org>, <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>, <webreq@w3.org>, <chairs@w3.org>, <w3t-comm@w3.org>, <michelsu@microsoft.com>

On Monday, March 17, 2008, 3:49:30 PM, John wrote:

JC> Chris Lilley scripsit:

>> Well, thats a far cry from what Martin said. Since the primary places
>> SVG, for instance, uses IRIs is XLink (15 or so elements are XLink
>> simple links) and the other places are XML Base and ... erm, can't
>> think of any others, that means they are **all** LEIRI.

JC> Well, yes, transitively.  For that matter, *any* XML document (okay,
JC> except SOAP ones) can contain a DOCTYPE declaration, and therefore can
JC> contain LEIRIs.  But I am talking about which specifications should
JC> mention LEIRIs.

JC> If SVG inherits its links from XLink and its base URI specifier from XML
JC> Base,

Yes. More specifically, SVG 1.1 gets XLink from XLink 1.0 and SVG Tiny 1.2 gets XLink form XLink 1.1.

 
JC>  then SVG documents can contain LEIRIs.  But that doesn't mean that
JC> SVG should *specify* LEIRIs. 

It sounds as if you are saying that SVG should specify a subset of what XLink and XML Base allow. So we say they accept an IRI. 

Which is simple, but then we catch flack for embrace-and-extend (well ok embrace-and-subset).

Or we could specify differently for content conformance (IRI only) and processors (LEIRI). Not very nice either.


JC>  Nor does it mean that a spec which refers
JC> *directly* to URIs or IRIs should be made to refer to LEIRIs, either.
JC> That last is the key point.





-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Interaction Domain Leader
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Monday, 17 March 2008 15:12:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 17 March 2008 15:12:36 GMT