W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xformsusers@w3.org > August 2018

URI Functions

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 14:22:09 +0200
To: public-xformsusers@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.zoghy7ohsmjzpq@steven-xps>
Hi gang,

Yesterday I received a mail from someone enquiring about the URI Functions.

  https://www.w3.org/community/xformsusers/wiki/XPath_Expressions_Module#URI_Functions

  4.9.1	The location-uri() Function
  4.9.2	The location-param() Function
  4.9.3	The uri-scheme() Function
  4.9.4	The uri-scheme-specific-part() Function
  4.9.5	The uri-authority() Function
  4.9.6	The uri-user-info() Function
  4.9.7	The uri-host() Function
  4.9.8	The uri-port() Function
  4.9.9	The uri-path() Function
  4.9.10	The uri-query() Function
  4.9.11	The uri-fragment() Function
  4.9.12	The uri-param-names() Function
  4.9.13	The uri-param-values() Function

which are there to be able to extract parts out of a URI (maybe we should  
use IRI to make it clear that IRIs are covered as well).

While looking at them, it struck me that they were really un-XForms like.

Since we already have a parse() function,

  https://www.w3.org/community/xformsusers/wiki/XPath_Expressions_Module#The_parse.28.29_Function

that takes a string and returns a document node, is it not better to have  
a single parse-IRI() function, that takes a string and returns a document  
node representing the parsed version of the IRI?

I played around for a while, and came up with some alternatives:

A call like

   parse-IRI("https://username:password@example.org:8080/pages/order?id=42&n1=v11#content")

could produce one of the following document nodes:

<iri>
    <scheme>https</scheme>
    <user>username</user>
    <password>password</password>
    <host>example.org</host>
    <port>8080</port>
    <path>/pages/order</path>
    <query><param name="id">42</param><param name="n1">v11</param></query>
    <fragment>content</fragment>
</iri>

<iri>
    <scheme>https</scheme>
    <user>username:password</user>
    <host>example.org</host>
    <port>8080</port>
    <path>/pages/order</path>
    <query name="id">42</query>
    <query name="n1">v11</query>
    <fragment>content</fragment>
</iri>

<iri>
    <scheme>https</scheme>
    <user>username:password</user>
    <host>example.org:8080</host>  or  <host port="8080">example.com</host>
    <path>/pages/order</path>
    <query name="id">42</query>
    <query name="n1">v11</query>
    <fragment>content</fragment>
</iri>

 From the point of view of simplicity but sufficiency I think I prefer the  
last.

Steven
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2018 12:22:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:37:50 UTC