- From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 15:22:14 -0700
- To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org, www-forms-editor@w3.org, Forms WG (new) <public-forms@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF2F85BA5F.065B81BF-ON8825735B.00026A00-8825735D.007AE6D1@ca.ibm.com>
Hi Felix, I would like to take this opportunity to provide a little context for the response than that which appeared in the prior response. I would then like to see whether that context helps to make the response more satisfactory for now. First, the spec that we normatively reference, XML Schema 1.0 Second Edition, defines xs:anyURI datatype in terms of RFC 2396, RFC 2732, and the algorithm in Section 5.4 of XLink [1]. It does not refer to RFC 3987 at all, as this document came out after XML Schema 1.0 Second Edition. The working group decided to defer to a future version upgrading the XML Schema engines required by XForms processors and design tools. And the more important fact, which responds to your response, is that the working group decided that upgrading to XPath 2.0 is a future feature scheduled for XForms 2.0, so the citation you gave of XPath 2.0 amounts to another pointer to a feature that is not within the scope of XForms 1.1. In other words, all of this functionality is amounting to requests for features that are not in the XForms 1.1 requirements ( http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms-11-req/). So, our response was not rejecting the request, but rather committing to adding this issue into the requirements stream of the appropriate version of XForms containing numerous requirements related to this request, Could you let us know if this information makes it possible to accept the resolution (understood grudgingly) with the understanding that it is on the agenda for our future. Thank you, John M. Boyer, Ph.D. STSM: Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher Chair, W3C Forms Working Group Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Victoria Software Lab E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> Sent by: www-forms-editor-request@w3.org 09/18/2007 08:43 AM To Nick Van den Bleeken <xforms-issues@mn.aptest.com> cc www-forms-editor@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org Subject Re: [XForms 1.1] i18n comment: IRIs for external schema locations possible? (PR#8) Hello Nick again, all, i18n core discussed your response and my reply at our call today. The Working Group endorsed my reply as a Working Group comment. Felix Felix Sasaki wrote: > > Nick Van den Bleeken wrote: >> Felix, >> >> XForms 1.1 is based on XML Schema 1.0 second ed., which does not >> appear to >> support all IRIs in the xsd:anyURI type. Therefore we will defer the >> support of >> all IRIs to a future version of XForms, which may be based on a >> version of >> schema later than 1.0 that will support all IRIs. > There are other specifications which rely on XML Schema 1.0 and also > support IRIs. An example are XPath 2 F/O, see > http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-xpath-functions-20070123/#uri : > [Within this specification, the term "URI" refers to Universal > Resource Identifiers as defined in [RFC 3986] and extended in [RFC > 3987] with a new name "IRI". [...] Note also that the definition of > xs:anyURI is a wider definition than the definition in [RFC 3987]; for > example it does not require non-ASCII characters to be escaped.] > > I think the statement above makes clear that your assumption "XML > Schema 1.0 second ed., which does not appear to support all IRIs in > the xsd:anyURI type. ", is not true. > > Hence, I would disagree with your resolution. We will discuss this > issue at our i18n core call next week (18 Sept.) and will provide you > with a Working Group reply (which should not stop you from replying to > my mail, but please keep public-i18n-core in the loop). > > Felix > >
Received on Friday, 21 September 2007 22:22:30 UTC