W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > February 2004

Re: feedback on draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03.txt

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 01:47:14 -0800
Cc: uri@w3.org
To: Daniel Barclay <Daniel.Barclay@fgm.com>
Message-Id: <C650AF37-5A1B-11D8-92BD-000393753936@gbiv.com>

On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 05:55  AM, Daniel Barclay wrote:

> * "The URI syntax is organized hierarchically, with components listed 
> in
>    decreasing order from left to right."
>
>   Should "in decreasing order" be "in order of decreasing 
> significance"?

okay.

> * "If data for a URI component would conflict with the reserved 
> purpose,
>   then the conflicting data must be escaped (Section 2.4) before 
> forming the
>   URI."
>
>   Shouldn't "escaped" be "encoded"?

Probably.  I have replaced it everywhere with "percent-encoding" as
part of yet another rewrite of the characters section.

> - "...extends...to the first question-mark ("?"), number-sign ("#"), or
>    the end of the URI string."
>
>   probably should be:
>
>    "...extends...to the first question-mark ("?") or number-sign ("#")
>    or the end of the URI string."
>
>   (Also, there are several similar non-parallel sentences.)

Your suggestion looks like bad grammar to me.  Is this an obscure rule?

> -  This:
>
>      ...the URI <mailto:fred@example.com> has...
>
>    would be less ambiguous if it were written with standard English
>    quoting, as:
>
>      ...the URI "mailto:fred@example.com" has...

Then it wouldn't be a fine example of the recommended quoting.

> - "URI generating applications"
>
>    should be
>
>   "URI-generating applications"

Done.

....Roy
Received on Sunday, 8 February 2004 04:46:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:07 UTC