- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 09:19:32 -0600
- To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
The production in that section is the normative definition. Any prose is explanatory. I will try to fix the regex to disallow whitespace. On 1/31/2012 7:57 AM, Michael[tm] Smith wrote: > Ivan Herman<ivan@w3.org>, 2012-01-31 14:20 +0100: > >> On Jan 31, 2012, at 13:48 , Michael[tm] Smith wrote: >> >> If everything goes as planned, the spec might be updated... today? > Cool. I hope the regexp in that other section can be updated too, then. > >>> That still disallows spaces in the reference part, though. >> That is intentional:-) > Yeah my point is the regexp in that other section needs to match what the > normative part of the spec says. > > Actually btw what is the normative definition of a CURIE? You spec has text > "The lexical space of a CURIE is as defined in curie below.", where the > word "curie" is hyperlink to part of the BNFy thing that follows. But that > thing is preceded by text that says, "The general syntax of a CURIE can be > summarized as follows:..." > > I'm looking for an assertion that states unambiguously what a valid CURIE > is, and "can be summarized" .. would not seem to qualify. > > So where can I find the actual normative CURIE definition? > > --Mike > -- Shane McCarron Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc. +1 763 786 8160 x120
Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2012 15:20:00 UTC