Next message: Jim Whitehead: "RE: Labels"
From: jamsden@us.ibm.com
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <8525688A.005D3E36.00@d54mta03.raleigh.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:57:52 -0500
Subject: RE: Labels
What if the labels (or other character data) are marshalled in headers
instead of an XML entity body? And what is the relationship between URLs
and RFC2277? Are they exempt? I suggest lables are somehow a logical
extension of URLs used to distinguish revisions of a versioned resource
identified by the URL. It would therefore be consistent to apply the same
rules used for URLs to labels.
|--------+---------------------------------->
| | Jim Whitehead |
| | <ejw@ics.uci.edu> |
| | Sent by: |
| | ietf-dav-versioning-requ|
| | est@w3.org |
| | |
| | |
| | 02/18/2000 08:33 PM |
| | |
|--------+---------------------------------->
>------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org |
| cc: |
| Subject: RE: Labels |
>------------------------------------------------------------|
Tim Ellison writes:
> To my knowledge, URLs are not internationalized.
> How do you write a URL with double-byte characters, etc?
There are no standards for how to create internationalized URLs, but there
is the following Internet-Draft:
http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/uri/draft-masinter-url-i18n-04.txt
"Internationalized Uniform Resource Identifiers (IURI)"
Larry Masinter, Martin Duerst
I'm not sure what the current status is of this draft.
> I think that the only distinction between labels and revision
> ids, is that users can define, set, remove, etc. labels. Making them
Strings
> simply adds unnecessary overhead to the spec. For example, we will have
to support
> operations on mixed ascii and Unicode and specified codepage labels,
> including switching on the fly when dealing with the LABEL XML body and
> adapting to clients' accept-charset requests. It's possible, but messy.
Since we're writing an IETF protocol specification, we have to ensure we
are
conformant with the document, "IETF Policy on Character Sets and
Languages",
RFC 2277 <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2277.txt>.
Requirements from the document that pertain here:
Protocols MUST be able to use the UTF-8 charset, which consists of
the ISO 10646 coded character set combined with the UTF-8 character
encoding scheme, as defined in [10646] Annex R (published in
Amendment 2), for all text.
Protocols MAY specify, in addition, how to use other charsets or
other character encoding schemes for ISO 10646, such as UTF-16, but
lack of an ability to use UTF-8 is a violation of this policy; such a
violation would need a variance procedure ([BCP9] section 9) with
clear and solid justification in the protocol specification document
before being entered into or advanced upon the standards track.
Since we're marshalling labels as XML, and since XML already specifies how
to record the character set encoding being used, as well as the language,
for the protocol i18n does not add any new marshalling concerns.
- Jim