- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 07:21:42 +1100
- To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
- Cc: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, public-media-fragment@w3.org
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 2:45 AM, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org> wrote: > On Sat, 21 Feb 2009, Michael Hausenblas wrote: > >> >> Yves, >> >> Solid work! Just two minor comments: >> >> a) Usually, one finds the top-level production at the beginning and the >> 'less important' ones (such as <DIGIT = %x30-39>, etc.) at the end. Any >> concrete reason why you chose the bottom-up style? > > in fact, those ones should be imported from 3986, I prefer to show external > dependencies upfront, but that's just a matter of style. > >> b) When reading our MF ABNF in relation to the generic URI ABNF rules as >> of >> RFC3985 [1], I was wondering if we need some more contextualisation? The >> 'Collected ABNF for URI' basically says: >> >> URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] >> fragment = *( pchar / "/" / "?" ) >> >> and we start with >> >> mediafragment = ( timefragment / spacefragment / trackfragment / >> namefragment ) * ( "&" ( timefragment / spacefragment / trackfragment / >> namefragment ) ) >> >> Where <mediafragment> per our ABNF == <fragment> per RFC3986, right? > > yes, I used mediafragment there as we might use this also for query URI, to > construct first-class URIs for "fragments" (as fragment is heavily > overloaded, we might find another word to describe parts of a document) I would make this explicit and create e.g. an element called "segment" that can explicitly be either a query or a fragment. Cheers, Silvia. >> c) Any good reason why you didn't introduce an intermediate for >> (timefragment / spacefragment / trackfragment / namefragment) in the >> top-level production rule? I guess it would increase the rule's >> readability >> and increase reusability, no? > > something like fragmentaxis ? In a way it would make harder the definition > of constraints between the different combinations of time/space/track > fragments. But as is it messy anyway, and only prose will save us from > outlining all the different ordered combinations... > >> >> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#appendix-A >> >> > > -- > Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras. > > ~~Yves > > >
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2009 20:22:21 UTC