W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: VBWG official response to last call issue

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 10:09:09 +0100
To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Cc: www-voice@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org
Message-ID: <42423ab0.716957593@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>

* Martin Duerst wrote:
> >>- Change the XML Schema definition of URI.datatype from:
> >>
> >>   <xsd:simpleType name='URI.datatype'>
> >>        <xsd:annotation>
> >>            <xsd:documentation>URI (RFC2396)</xsd:documentation>
> >>        </xsd:annotation>
> >>        <xsd:restriction base='xsd:anyURI'/>
> >>   </xsd:simpleType>
> >>
> >>   to:
>
> >>            <xsd:documentation>IRI (RFC3987)</xsd:documentation>
>
> >This would introduce ambiguity into the specification as it would
> >be unclear whether implementations must process this type per the
> >requirements in XML Schema or the requirements in RFC 3987 (which
> >are different).
>
>RFC 2396 and xsd:anyURI are not the same either. So this only replaces
>one ambiguity with another, smaller one.

They have a different lexical space but the processing requirements for
their common lexical space is equivalent. This is not the case for RFC
3987 and XML Schema's anyURI datatype. And regardless of how different
those are, we should remove ambiguity from specifications, not add them
or trade one for another.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Thursday, 17 March 2005 09:09:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 October 2006 12:49:01 GMT