W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-soap-jms@w3.org > September 2010

Re: [Uri-review] New posting of the "jms" URI scheme

From: Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:08:42 -0700
Message-ID: <4C98E69A.8060404@tibco.com>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
CC: uri-review@ietf.org, SOAP-JMS <public-soap-jms@w3.org>
 Hi Bhoern,

We discussed this in the SOAP-JMS working group, and don't quite
understand your concern.

As I understand it, URIs encode spaces as %20 in part to remove
ambiguity around situations where it might wrap.  For example


can unambiguously be understood (by a human, at least) as


We also don't have a problem with parameter names or values having
spaces in them, and pretty much expect that they'll be preserved.  Seems
like we don't need to explicitly state that "parametername" is clearly
distinct from "parameter%20name".

Are there other URI schemes that address the question of spaces in
URIs?  Can you point to the text in those specs, so I can get a feel for
the character possible textual changes we might make?  I just don't
recall tripping over language like that before.



On 09/20/2010 05:14 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> * Eric Johnson wrote:
>>  Darts welcome:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-merrick-jms-uri-09
>> This version addresses a bunch of concerns raised privately in email by 
>> members of the IETF, mostly around the question of how to compare two 
>> "jms" URIs, as well as removing non-normative uses of RFC 2119 language.
> It might be a good idea to specify whether (and if, how) white space in
> parameter names and values (and so on) is significant. The identifiers
> can apparently get rather long, and some implementations might ignore
> for instance the space in `jms:x:y?z=%20example` to accomodate people
> wrapping the identifiers (similarily, %00 and %0A may be an issue).
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2010 17:08:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:24:48 UTC