Re: I-D Action: draft-reschke-ref-parsing-00.txt

On 2011-07-03 12:30, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> * internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-reschke-ref-parsing-00.txt
>
> I think it is unnecessary and confusing to have this "Candidate" layer
> of indirection (I don't see what trouble people have with the regular
> expression to begin with, so I feel similar about the document as a
> whole). It's not meaningful for instance to say some string has scheme,
> authority, path, but only a candidate query; that's just weird.

I found it useful to have terms for the components of a reference that 
isn't valid. What do others think?

> In section 3.2 you have "The result will be a valid URI Reference if
> and only if the components used by the algorithm were valid themselves."
> I have some doubts about "only if", consider for instance removing dot
> segments, which might remove a malformed part, if I recall correctly.

Good point.

> As for B.3., I would think the only people who might find that a vaguely
> good idea are people who have trouble applying regular expressions, and
> I see no reason to accomodate them with normative documents (I assume it

Partly agreed. It's indeed an attempt to satisfy those people who claim 
that the regexp isn't good enough.

> is meant for normative reference and not just illustration).

Normative vs Informative is a good discussion to have once the WG has 
decided this is a useful document. For now I have marked it with an 
intended status of "Informational", but this may not be sufficient for 
people who would depend on this.

Best regards, Julian

Received on Sunday, 3 July 2011 11:08:32 UTC