- From: Liam Quin <liam@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:26:14 -0500
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 04:47:01PM -0500, Mark Baker wrote: > URI-escaping should work fine as an encoding, I expect, and I thank the > WG for making that decision. > > But, what now remains absent from the XQuery specification is a > normative dependency on it as the canonical encoding to be used for > XQuery documents serialized into URI form. Speaking for myself here, and not the WG... Note that it's not generally enough to escape a query in a URI; you'll need to decide whether to use CGI-style encoding, and if so, what the variables should be called, and how to name a script that interfaces to a query... Or are you expecting a standardised WHEREIS query for a Web page? Do I do, http://www.example.org/collections/36/search.pl?query=XXXX or do I do http://www.example.org/~user/cgi-bin/q.cgi?srch=XXXX The best I can suggest here is that you investigate WSDL and Web Services for a more general mechanism than I believe XML Query can or should provide. > We have closed this issue for now; please let us know if this > disposition is not satisfactory. > Sorry, it's not. 8-( Are you asking for the XML Query Specification to have a note saying that queries can be put in a "GET" URL and escaped as per the URL RFC? Or that when embedded in a URL, queries must be escaped according to the rules of said spec? Doesn't that follow automatically from HTTP and the URI/IRI spec? I'm sorry if I'm being slow -- I'm missing how interoperability is helped by a more specific note. How do you think we should proceed? Thanks, Liam -- Liam Quin, W3C XML Activity Lead, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2004 03:18:51 UTC