- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 21:08:33 -0700
- To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Cc: uri@w3.org, xerces-j-dev@xml.apache.org
On Apr 8, 2005, at 9:28 AM, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: > An issue has been raised with Xerces's schema validation of certain > kinds of URIs that appear to be legal in 2396 and illegal in 3986. See > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1060 for details. > > Briefly it appears that an indefinite number of colon and @ characters > were allowed in reg-names in RFC 2396 and forbidden in RFC 3986. > This doesn't seem to be called out as a change in D2 of 3986. > > For instance, dcp.tcp.pft://192.168.0.1:1002:3002?fec=1&crc=0 is legal > in 2396 and not in 3986. > > Was this decision deliberate? Yes > Or did it accidentally fall out of other changes made to the BNF > grammar? Or am I missing something obvious, and this URI is legal (or > illegal) in both RFCs? No URI schemes were defined using the reg_name syntax of 2396, and therefore it was removed. ....Roy
Received on Saturday, 9 April 2005 04:08:37 UTC