W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Ineffective pattern for CURIE

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 15:15:42 -0500
Message-ID: <4FAC21EE.9080905@aptest.com>
To: www-html-editor@w3.org, brian.ames@ameshymn.org
I recommend you look at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core - there is a 
better pattern for CURIE in there.  It is the current best definition of 
CURIE.

On 5/9/2012 10:25 PM, Brian M. Ames wrote:
> The pattern given for CURIE in 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/NOTE-curie-20101216 is ineffective for 
> validation since it matches anything but an empty string. That is to 
> say (([\i-[:]][\c-[:]]*)?:)?.+ is no different than .+ alone. An 
> alternative would be (([\i-[:]][\c-[:]]*)?:).+|([^:])+ which would 
> require any CURIE without a prefix but containing a colon to be 
> prefixed with a colon delimiter.
> Example
> a:1:more:time
> :1:more:time
> 1 more time
> would all be valid but
> 1:more:time
> would not be.
>

-- 
Shane McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
+1 763 786 8160 x120
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2012 20:16:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 10 May 2012 20:16:23 GMT