- From: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:10:04 -0700
- To: "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- CC: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, public-iri@w3.org, www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org, public-xml-core-wg@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org
The following note is PERSONAL and does not represent the Internationalization Core WG. Hi Paul, I'm concerned about this discussion. I note that it has been a long standing (perhaps mythological) belief by many of us in the internationalization activity that XLink, XML Base, et al, represented an instance of IRI. I thought that was a Good Thing and have been distressed to discover that, rather than developing in the direction of normatively referencing IRI, the issue has become murkier. In fact, CharMod says that XLink 1.0 is meant to be IRI: http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod-resid/#sec-URIs I personally support Martin's desire to avoid fragmentation into various flavors of IRI by incorporating the necessary few minor changes into IRI itself. I'm not sure there is a sound case for IRI-with-space: I need to study your reasons further, myself. > I think this may be a "typo". I believe we intended > this to become an RFC. There is no such thing as "just an RFC". The document has to have an intended status (which is where you probably got your BCP). Your choices at the IETF include Informational, BCP, and standards-track. The closest to "just an RFC" is the "Informational" category. It's not uncommon to use this format for the purpose you have in mind. I would tend, personally, to recommend against an Informational RFC, simply because the other xRI formats are on the STD track. The additional scrutiny of the STD track would, I think, benefit everyone involved. Note that the draft can be published as an RFC (and thus referenced) prior to attaining STD status. I am sure that the Internationalization Core WG will shortly take up this topic (since it is already scheduled for our next teleconference). However, I felt that it would be wise to respond personally in advance, noting some concern exists. Also, I note that the I18N Arch WG is probably concerned here, since they maintain CharMod and CharMod-Resid. Addison -- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature.
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2007 21:10:39 UTC