W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-i18n-comments@w3.org > February 2004

Re: Your comments on the Character Model [C001, C002, C168, C169, C170]

From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>
Date: 26 Feb 2004 14:55:08 -0700
To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Cc: Michael@w3.org, www-i18n-comments@w3.org, W3C XML Schema WG <w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1077832506.2489.121.camel@localhost>

On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 13:25, Richard Ishida wrote:
> Dear Michael,
> 
> Many thanks for your comments on the 2nd Last Call version of the Character
> Model for the World Wide Web v1.0 [1].  We appreciate the interest you have
> taken in this specification.
> 
> You can see the comments you submitted on behalf of XML Schema WG, grouped
> together, at 
> http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2002/charmod-lc/SortByGroup.html#C001
> (You can jump to a specific comment in the table by adding its ID to the end
> of the URI.)

Thank you for your note and for your exemplary management of
your last-call issues list.  

> The following comments were accepted and edits were made along the lines you
> suggested. We do not need you to comment on the edits made, but if you wish
> to, please reply to us within the next two weeks at
> mailto:www-i18n-comments@w3.org and copy w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org.
>         C001, C002, C168, C169

We have reviewed the decisions recorded in your last-call
comments table, and the edits made in connection with C001,
C002, C168, and C169.  We note your disposition of our comments,
and we are satisfied with them.  Thank you very much.

> PLEASE REVIEW the decisions for the following additional comment and reply
> to us within the next two weeks at mailto:www-i18n-comments@w3.org (copying
> w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org) to say whether you are satisfied with the decision
> taken. 
>         C170
> 
> Information relating to this comment is included below. ...
> DECISIONS REQUIRING A RESPONSE
> ==============================
> 
> C170	S	P	C	C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
> 	XML Schema WG
> 	P	MD	8	Converting to RFC-2396-style URIs
> 
>     *
> 
>       See also the following comments: C031 C059
>     *
> 
>       Comment (received 2002-07-12) -- Converting to RFC-2396-style URIs
> 
>       We note with some alarm that section 8 of the specification no longer
> contains an account of any algorithm for converting internationalized
> resource identifiers into uniform resource identifiers as defined by RFC
> 2396 and widely implemented. We believe that the algorithm which was
> presented in the first last-call draft should be restored, in order to allow
> other W3C specifications to refer to it as needed. (Note that the XML Schema
> 1.0 Recommendation does refer readers to section 8 of this document for
> information about conversion problems -- information which this version of
> the document no longer provides.) We do not believe the reference to section
> 2.2.5 of RFC 2718 serves as an adequate substitute: RFC 2718 is
> informational, not normative, and its account of the algorithm presupposes
> more familiarity with the family of URI specifications than it is reasonable
> to assume, even of writers of W3C specifications.
>     *
> 
>       Decision: Partially accepted.
> 
>       Rationale: Our plan is that the IRI Internet-Draft, referenced in this
> section, will have been submitted for Proposed Standard by the time CharMod
> moves to the next stage (CR). Conversion from IRIs to URIs is fully
> addressed in the IRI spec, and is needed there, and should therefore not be
> duplicated in charmod.
> 
>       The reference to RFC 2718 is informative only. To make this clearer,
> we have moved it out of the actual conformance criterion (C060) into a
> separate sentence reading "This is in accordance with Guidelines for new URL
> Schemes [rfc2718] Section 2.2.5.". In any way, that part of that section
> speaks about new schemas and things such as XPointer, not about 'IRI slots'
> such as anyURI.

Thank you for your response.  The XML Schema WG views with
some regret the absence of the algorithm from the character
model specification, but we have to agree that your rationale
is convincing.  We accept your disposition of this comment.
Thank you very much.

-C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
 on behalf of the W3C XML Schema Working Group
Received on Thursday, 26 February 2004 16:57:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:19:00 UTC