- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:54:37 +0200
- To: uri@w3.org
Hi Joe/Mark/Marc/David, I think this goes into the right direction. Congratulations. The main issue I see is that the spec doesn't seem to have a position on what to do with values that contain non-URI friendly character sequences. For instance, in <http://bitworking.org/projects/URI-Templates/draft-gregorio-uritemplate-00.html#rfc.section.4.2.p.2> you say: "If the value of a template variable would conflict with a reserved character's purpose as a delimiter, then the conflicting data must be percent-encoded before substitution." However, in <http://bitworking.org/projects/URI-Templates/draft-gregorio-uritemplate-00.html#rfc.section.4.3> we see: +++++++++++ The following are examples of URI Template expansions that are not legal. Name Value ------------------------------------------------------------ a fred barney b % The following URI Templates are expanded with the given values and do not produce legal URIs. http://example.org/{a} http://example.org/fred barney http://example.org/{b}/ http://example.org/%/ +++++++++++ ..although I would have assumed that "http://example.org/{b}/" should have been expanded to "http://example.org/%25/" according to Section 4.2... My other feedback is mainly editorial/formal...: Content: - Section 4.3: in the examples: "scheme" != "schema" Editorial: - Superfl. whitespace in "machine- readable" and "well- known" - Spell out "interoperability" instead of "interop" - Outdated references RFC2234 (-> RFC4234) and RFC2717 (-> RFC4395) - In first sentence of Section 4, the internal ref seems to lack a ", see ..." - when citing RFC3986, it would be nice when the concrete section number was given (several places) - Section 4.3: maybe make that use an xml2rfc texttable element Formal: - I think the xml2rfc docName shouldn't contain the extension "txt" - I've never seen "individual" as an org name in an IETF document; leaving it out instead seems to be the agreed-upon way to do it... Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 5 October 2006 13:54:52 UTC