W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > September 2009

Re: [hybi] ws: and wss: schemes

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 10:46:17 +0000 (UTC)
To: URI <uri@w3.org>, "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>, "uri-review@ietf.org" <uri-review@ietf.org>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0909051042290.26930@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> >
> > That's what I thought, but then I got feedback saying I had to 
> > register an IRI scheme if I wanted to use IRIs.
> > 
> > I've no interest in making ws: and wss: URIs. Only IRIs.
> > 
> > If I define the syntax to be a subset of the full URI syntax, how does 
> > it ever get extended to be a subset of the full IRI syntax?
> > 
> > What should I put in the spec to make you happy and to make the use of 
> > ws: and wss: IRIs fully well-defined?
> 
> The point is not to make me happy, but to do the right thing.

My idea of "the right thing" and your idea of "the right thing" have very 
little in common, so really, for me, it boils down to making you happy.


> Just define a URI scheme; use of ws IRIs will be defined automatically 
> in terms of RFC 3987 (IRI experts, please correct me if I'm wrong).

That's what I thought I had done; since you disagree that I had done that, 
please provide the copy that you believe would do the job, so that we can 
stop dancing around playing "warmer/colder" with this text.


> > > The RFC reference is immutable. Just paste the content in your 
> > > source file, and change the anchor attribute value.
> > 
> > My source file is an HTML document, so I don't think that would work 
> > well.
> 
> The source file that you feed into xml2rfc is an XML file using the 
> RFC2629bis syntax. You control that file. Put into it what you need.

There's no such file; the XML is generated by a script and posted straight 
to the xml2rfc Web service. I have every intention of keeping this as 
automatic as possible; I already have to go out of my way to make the 
references to [WEBADDRESSES] and [HTML5] work, I really don't want to have 
to start doing the same for IETF documents when I don't actually have to.


> > I've read this, but as far as I can tell, "Always UTF-8" and "See IRI" 
> > are both complete and accurate ways of addressing this.
> > 
> > Since apparently neither of these options satisfies you, could you state
> > exactly what literal text would satisfy you?
> 
> I already pointed you to RFC 5092 as relatively recent example, see 
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5092#section-8>.

I tried following the lead given in that draft, but it didn't satisfy you. 
Could you provide literal text that would satisfy you?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 5 September 2009 10:43:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:42 GMT