Re: I18N (was: Closing rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about)

One note on the text there:

"Since escaping is not always a fully reversible process"

If the character % were itself escaped, then escaping *would be* fully reversible.

Mark

—————

Δός μοι ποῦ στῶ, καὶ κινῶ τὴν γῆν — Ἀρχιμήδης
[http://www.macchiato.com]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Francois Yergeau" <FYergeau@alis.com>
To: "Martin Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>; "Graham Klyne" <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>; <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 7:27 AM
Subject: RE: I18N (was: Closing rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about)


> Martin Duerst wrote:
> > At 10:32 01/10/17 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote:
> > >There is some language in the XML linking spec 
> > >(http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink/#link-locators) that I am 
> > planning to adapt 
> > >for the CC/PP spec:
> > 
> > Yes, this is the clearest language we currently have.
> 
> You might also want to look at the (very) recently published erratum E26 to
> the XML spec at http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-2e-errata#E26.
> 
> Strictly speaking, it only applies to system literals in XML since, as
> Martin correctly points out 'XML processors don't know about most URIs in an
> XML doc'.  But I think it does express quite clearly what is the expected
> treatment of URIs in general and can be used as a useful guide.
> 
> -- 
> François 
> 
>