- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 01:47:14 -0800
- To: Daniel Barclay <Daniel.Barclay@fgm.com>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
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