- From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
- Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:07:50 +0100
- To: uri@w3.org
Charles Lindsey wrote: >| message-id = 1*printable-ascii "@" 1*printable-ascii >| printable-ascii = %d33-61 / %d63-126 ; excludes ">" >| >| A <message-id> corresponds to the <msg-id> of RFC 2822 and >| to the Message-ID of section 2.1.5 of RFC 1036, but without >| the enclosing "<" and ">". I like it. >| It MUST be the message identifier of an actual Netnews >| article and hence will in practice conform to the syntax >| defined in RFC 1036 or in any subsequent standard for >| Netnews articles. Thus not every <message-id> as defined >| above is valid. True, but I'd avoid the MUST if it's not absolutely necessary. Maybe only a matter of taste, and if that's the case forget it. >| Observe the delimiter "@" which enables an <article> to be >| distinguished from a <newsgroup-name>. That's important, and I'm still unsure about news URLs with %40 instead of @, who is responsible to get this right, the UA ? >| Observe also that any reserved character within a >| <printable-ascii> will need to be %-encoded. http://gbiv.com/protocols/uri/rev-2002/rfc2396bis.html#reserved apparently says that all schemes are free to define their own reserved char.s For the news scheme we're interested in "/", "@", ">", and "%". Your syntax handles ">" and asks for at least one "@". That's good enough for the normal <unique@mdomain> and for odd cases like <"foo@bar"@mdomain>. Is <news:unique%40mdomain> implicitly okay ? <news:"foo@bar"> is implicitly bad, <"foo@bar"> is no Message-ID, and it's also no group. Dito <news:"foo%40bar">. <news:"foo%40bar"%40mdomain> could be again okay, it's about the Message-ID <"foo@bar"@mdomain> (as per 2396bis 2.1). My UA doesn't like it, maybe it's a s-o-1036 extremist like me ;-) <news:"bro%ken"%40mdomain> is broken beyond repair, it should be <news:"bro%25ken"%40mdomain> for msg-id <"bro%ken"@mdomain>. What about <news://auth@example/unique@mdomain> ? You didn't explicitly say that "/" is reserved, is this about the (bad) Message-ID <//auth@example/unique@mdomain>, or does the UA know that it's <unique@mdomain> on server example with login auth ? Let's assume that "/" is implicitly reserved by your syntax. Then <news://example/path@mdomain> is tricky, it's NOT about Message-ID <//example/path@mdomain>. A real problem, because Message-IDs like <path/file/2004-12-31@mdomain> exist, and Message-ID <//example/path/date@mdomain> is allowed. <news:%2F/example/path/date@mdomain> or <news:/%2Fexample/path/date@mdomain> should IMHO work. But a <news://example%2Fpath/date@mdomain> is probably bad, and a <news://example/path%2Fdate@mdomain> is something different, it's Message-ID <path/date@mdomain> on server example. > Please can somebody tell me whether the remark about reserved > characters and %-encoding is the correct thing to say there? IMHO you should also say _which_ characters are reserved in the news scheme. AFAIK "%" is always reserved, it's in a separate chapter of 2396bis. Apparently you need "/" as reserved char. But you don't need "@" and ":", they are only reserved in... | authority = [ userinfo "@" ] host [ ":" port ] ...and that's handled in 2396bis. BTW, 2396bis says authority instead of server, it's probably better to adopt this term: | news-server = "//" authority | | <authority> is defined in [2396bis], and provides for a [etc.] > the remaining issue is what to do about the '*' notation. [...] > Comments and opinions? I like the solution in draft-gilman-news-url-02 section 2.2: | Note that user agents may extend the ability to refer to | groups by use of "*" as a string wild-card. Add this note to your section 2.2 (your first 2.2, the second should be 2.3 ;-), and remove the "*" from the overall syntax: | all-groups = news-server [ "/" ] This implicitly kills the "*" problem in 2.3, and if a 2.2 "*" doesn't work as expected it's a problem or feature of the UA. My UA treats say <news://news.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.*> like <news://news.gmane.org/> or simply <news://news.gmane.org>. The dubious RfC 1738 <news:*> is still covered by the note in <http://www.newsreaders.com/tech/draft-gilman-news-url-02.txt> if you copy it to 2.2 (see above), because in 2.2 the server... | group = [ news-server "/" ] newsgroup-name ...is optional, and Gilman's note allows "*" as wildcard. For some questions about your NNTP section 3 and SNEWS see <news://news.gmane.org/41C8775F.4294@xyzzy.claranet.de> or <http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.w3c.uri/333> or maybe <http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.w3c.uri:333> The latter form is already one of the questions ;-) Bye, Frank
Received on Friday, 31 December 2004 15:21:45 UTC