- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 13:21:12 +0900
- To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, "Addison Phillips" <addison.phillips@quest.com>, "Martin Duerst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
- Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 04:02:47 +0900, Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com> wrote: > Wonderful, thanks. Unless I hear otherwise, I'll put this proposal > before the WG. Thank you very much, Addison. That looks fine with me. Felix > > -----Original Message----- > From: Addison Phillips [mailto:addison.phillips@quest.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:31 AM > To: Jonathan Marsh; Martin Duerst; Felix Sasaki; > 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 > > Hi Jonathan/WSDL-WG, > > This is a personal response. I hope that the WG can address this next > week and send you an official response. > > The differences are actually quite simple. XLink 1.0 uses almost exactly > the same text as IRI Section 3.1 Step 2. It omits Step 1. > > Step 1 consists of three things. > > 1a. covers when you transcribe an IRI into a digital form from a > non-digital form (e.g. when you type in the IRI you wrote down on a > napkin earlier). This can't apply to WSDL, of course, unless the WSDL > starts to be printed on the sides of buses or the backs of envelopes :-). > > 1b. covers conversion from a "legacy" (non-Unicode) encoding to a > Unicode encoding and requires normalizing the text using Unicode > Normalization Form C. Since WSDL is defining an XML document, which is > defined as a sequence of Unicode characters, this is really a > consideration for the XML processor, I believe, rather than something > WSDL itself needs to address. > > 1c. is basically a no-op: it covers normalization of IRIs already in a > Unicode encoding (you don't normalize if the IRI is already in Unicode). > > So the difference is the application of (1b) when the document is > encoded using a non-Unicode encoding, something that probably doesn't > apply to WSDL directly anyway: it is something that happens at the XML > processor level, XML documents being a sequence of Unicode characters... > > In any case, I agree with Martin. I would suggest text more like the > following instead: > > -- > Note: The xs:anyURI type is defined so that xs:anyURI values are > essentially IRIs [RFC 3987]. The conversion from xs:anyURI values to an > actual URI is via an escaping procedure defined by [XLink 1.0], which is > identical in most respects to IRI Section 3.1. (The only difference > being that IRI defines handling of non-Unicode encoded byte sequences, > considerations which do not affect this document directly.) > -- > > Best Regards, > > Addison > > Addison P. Phillips > Globalization Architect, Quest Software > Chair, W3C Internationalization Core Working Group > > Internationalization is not a feature. > It is an architecture. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org [mailto:public-i18n-core- >> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh >> Sent: 2005年11月1日 9:59 >> To: Martin Duerst; Felix Sasaki; 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 >> >> >> 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 Wednesday, 2 November 2005 04:21:25 UTC