W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > September 2003

% in URIs

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 18:04:15 +0100
Message-ID: <3F54CD8F.4020305@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>


Graham (offlist) wrote:
 > ACTION: 2003-08-29#3 gk check CONCEPTS 6.4 wrt details of URI and "%"
 >
 > cf.  pfps comment on sectin 6.4 of concepts
 >   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0282.html
 > [[
 > It appears to me that RDF Concepts does not require % to be %-escaped in
 > RDF URI references (Section 6.4).  Surely this is a bug.
 > ]]
 >
 > So, checking:
 >
 > 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-concepts-20030117/#section-Graph-URIref 

 >
 > [[
 > The disallowed octets that must be %-escaped include all those that do
 > not correspond to US-ASCII characters, and the excluded characters
 > listed in Section 2.4 of [URI], except for the number sign (#), percent
 > sign (%), and the square bracket characters re-allowed in [RFC-2732].
 > ]]
 >
 > I think PFPS is right, and that ", the percent sign (%)" should be
 > deleted from the above paragraph.

I tried to take the text from the usual suspects and minimize the 
divergence between different W3C specs.

cf in particular

http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-charmod-20030822/#sec-URIs

which links to
http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-2e-errata#E26
http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink/#link-locators
http://www.w3.org/International/2002/draft-duerst-iri-00.txt

None of these %-escape %.

I believe that w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org and uri@w3.org may be appropriate forums 
for discussion of this issue.

I am unwilling to make a change before the 5th September publication.
Nor would I be happy with a change that is opposed by a consensus in the 
above forums.

I am not yet convinced that this materially affects RDF since we *never* 
require the escaping to actually be performed, it is merely a theoretical 
exercise that defines a set of strings. I believe that the set of strings 
is the same whether or not % is itself escaped.

Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2003 13:42:36 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:59:53 EDT