RE: Labels

From: Jim Whitehead (ejw@ics.uci.edu)
Date: Mon, Feb 21 2000

  • Next message: Vasta, John: "Enumerating repositories and workspaces"

    From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
    To: jamsden@us.ibm.com, ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
    Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 21:19:04 -0800
    Message-ID: <NDBBIKLAGLCOPGKGADOJKEGKCOAA.ejw@ics.uci.edu>
    Subject: RE: Labels
    
    
    
    > What if the labels (or other character data) are marshalled in headers
    > instead of an XML entity body?
    
    My understanding is that it doesn't matter where in the protocol the
    information is marshalled, if it is text intended to be viewed by a person,
    then it must be i18nable.  After all, it does not matter to a user in China
    how the data is marshalled, only that it is possible for him to set and read
    labels in a character set he understands.
    
    > And what is the relationship between URLs and RFC2277? Are they exempt?
    
    Yes, but only because they are a huge legacy problem. I seriously doubt the
    current syntax of URLs would be approved as-is today.
    
    > 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.
    
    Wiggle all you want, the fact remains that the strings are intended for
    consumption by a person.
    
    If the protocol passes WG review and still has non i18nable labels, it is my
    belief this would be flagged by the area director or by a member of the IESG
    (Harald Alvestrand is especially keen on these issues), and would be
    something we'll have to fix before the protocol is finally approved.  I
    think it would be much easier to work this into the protocol earlier, rather
    than later.
    
    - Jim