RE: Comments on WSDL 2.0 (Core, Adjuncts, Soap 1.1 Binding) from the i18n core wg

Do you have the differences at your fingertips or will I have to do my
own homework? :-)  And, which do you prefer, that we list diffs or stay
quiet? I expect the WG to adopt the I18N suggestions without much
dissent so having a clear position from the experts is valuable.

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Duerst [mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp] 
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 1:08 AM
To: Felix Sasaki; Jonathan Marsh; public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
Subject: Re: Comments on WSDL 2.0 (Core, Adjuncts, Soap 1.1 Binding)
from the i18n core wg

Same comment here as for XLink 1.1: I think it's not a good idea to
use the text below (provided by Felix) as such, because it easily
may give the impression that there are serious differences when
the chances for differences is actually very small. So I think it's
better to either list the differences or not say anything.

Regards,   Martin.

At 12:41 05/10/26, Felix Sasaki wrote:
 >
 >On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 06:32:11 +0900, Jonathan Marsh
<jmarsh@microsoft.com>
 >wrote:
 >
 >>
 >> The WG had a hard time understanding your comment 3:
 >>
 >> "It would be good if you could mention that although xs:anyURI
allows
 >> for IRIs (see LC74a), the mapping from IRI to URI in xs:anyURI is
 >> currently not defined in terms of IRI. This comment relates also for
 >> example to the reference of xs:anyURI in sec. 2.1.2.1 and sec.
3.1.2.1,
 >> and to the Adjuncts specification."
 >>
 >> Can you provide us with more background, or perhaps precise wording
for
 >> what you'd like to see?
 >
 >
 >Sorry for being unclear. The problem is as follows, and this is also a
 >proposal for some text which you might integrate as a note in WSDL
2.0:
 >
 >xs:anyURI defines a mapping from xs:anyURI values to URIs via an URI
 >reference escaping procedure. In the current version of XML Schema 2,
this
 >procedure is defined in terms of XLink 1.0, and does not reply on the
 >escaping procedure from RFC 3987 (IRI, sec. 3.1). Hence, relying on
 >xs:anyURI might generate escaped URIs which are different from IRI
based
 >escaped URIs.
 >
 >Is that o.k. with you?
 >
 >Best regards,
 >
 >Felix
 >
 >>
 >> -----Original Message-----
 >> From: public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org
 >> [mailto:public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Felix
 >> Sasaki
 >> Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 8:54 PM
 >> To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
 >> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
 >> Subject: Comments on WSDL 2.0 (Core, Adjuncts, Soap 1.1 Binding)
from
 >> the i18n core wg
 >>
 >>
 >> Dear Web Services Description Working Group,
 >>
 >> With this mail I am sending you i18n comments [1] on the WSDL 2.0
WDs
 >> (Core, Adjuncts, Soap 1.1 Binding). Since I am rather late (please
 >> accept
 >> my appologies), there was no time to get endorsement from the i18n
core
 >>
 >> wg. So please regard these comments currently as my personal
comments.
 >>
 >> I am looking forward for you feedback. Best regards,
 >>
 >> Felix Sasaki (team contact of the i18n core wg)
 >>
 >> [1] http://www.w3.org/International/2005/10/wsdl20-review.html
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >
 >
 >

Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2005 18:00:01 UTC