- From: Stasinos Konstantopoulos <konstant@iit.demokritos.gr>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 07:02:54 +0300
- To: Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>
On Thu Jun 5 11:14:07 2008 Phil Archer said: > PROPOSED RESOLUTION: That the <includehosts> element be mandatory for > all IRI set definitions. > > In favour 1: It gives us a way to ensure syntactically that an IRI set > is never empty not quite true, as stray descriptorsets are, effectively, DRs with an empty iriset. it, in fact, only restricts the number if syntactic constructs that define empty IRI sets. > In favour 2: It seems to feel right and generally make sense for our use > cases. > > Against 1: It places a limit on flexibility that may be unwarranted or > undesirable. Although not formalised (thankfully), a lot of web sites do > things the same way such as /images, /contact, /about etc. It wouldn't > be too hard to come up with a reason therefore one day to produce a DR > that described all resources on all domains where the path starts with > /images for example. that's possible even with the restriction in place: there is a finite and closed set of top-level domains, so one can easilly write an includehosts that enumerates all TLDs, thus syntactically conforming with the restriction, but semantically allowing all hosts. > Against 2: <includeiripattern>, the WAF-inspired element, always > includes a host so you always end up with redundant elements if you use > that. Likewise if you use <includeregex> you don't necessarily, (but > might) need <includehosts>. > > I can't decide whether I'm for or against. I think I'm 55-45 against but > remain to be convinced one way or the other. I suggest using http://www.random.org/files/ to resolve this. Person A matches odd and even numbers against a decision, and emails Person B. Person C selects a file and emails Person B. Person B resolves the issue by checking whether the first byte of the selected file is odd or even (unsigned interpretation, zero is even). Person B announces the result as well as A and B's choices, who confirm that these indeed were their choices. s
Received on Friday, 6 June 2008 04:03:36 UTC