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: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:45:30 +0900
Message-Id: <>
To: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Cc: Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, "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

At 00:23 08/03/18, John Cowan wrote:
>Chris Lilley scripsit:
>> Thanks, Richard. It does indeed currently refer to them simly as IRIs,
>> and points to RFC 3987 for the definition. It does also normatively
>> refer to XLink; but it also says what the type of the attributes are
>> rather than "they are whatever Xlink says" because, for one thing,
>> we have a DOM while XLink does not specify one.
>Okay, fair enough.  So SVG allows a subset of what XLink allows: nothing
>amiss with that.

Well, if it were an arbitrary subset, that might be a problem.
(A very bad example would be allowing a subset of IRIs that e.g.
excluded Cyrillic and Thai.) But restricting yourself to IRIs
is not a problem at all. XML, XLink and XBase would most probably
restrict themselves to IRIs proper if it had not been for the fact
that for some years, they used a circumscriptive definition of
what would become IRIs. This circumstriptive definition is some-
what wider than IRIs, and they don't want to run the risk that some
users, or some other specification out there (e.g. something like
SVG) was actually making use of some of the additional characters
that are allowed in LEIRIs but not IRIs. As SVG doesn't have that
problem, and as all of the characters allowed in LEIRIs but not IRIs
are in one way or another problematic, SVG is perfectly fine with

Regards,    Martin.

#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp     
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2008 05:56:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:39 UTC