Re: obsoleting 3986 -- what would it look like?

On 2012-11-05 00:29, David Sheets wrote:
> Hi Larry,
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote:
>> Initially as a thought experiment, I've started to sketch out what it would look like to obsolete 3986 (URI) with a document that combined it with 3987 (IRI), reverts to the "URL" name, and gave updated parsing advice.
>>
>> Doing so is pretty ambitious, of course, and likely to lead to all sorts of controversies, but I thought I'd give it a try.
>>
>> *  how much of the introductory and explanatory material from 3896 and 3897 to retain. While it's philosophically and historically interesting, it's also a fertile ground for philosophical debates over whether http://larry.masinter.net#the_person could  identify, locate, or name me rather than a paragraph of my home page. So I'm tempted to leave all that behind.
>> * how much of the historical reasons for distinguishing between URIs and IRIs to leave. Again, it's interesting and useful material, but less so for practitioners who just want to know what a URL is and how to use it.
>>    My temptation at this point is to leave out most of the explanatory material, and just put appendixes for URI, IRI and LEIRI which explain them as prior syntactic restrictions which are still supported by older protocols (including HTTP 1.x). Will HTTP 2.0 support UTF-8 URLs?
>> * Include URNs? I'm tempted to include at least a pointer to URNbis, but I'm not sure which one.
>> * I'm having trouble resisting the temptation to put a stake into the httpRange-14 by removing any basis for support of using http URLs to "mean" abstractions or people. Right now I'm considering putting that in a "URLs and Semantic Web" appendix.
>> * I'll accept sincere offers of co-authorship as long as you're willing to accept the requirements that to obsolete 3986 we need to address current use cases that make reference to 3986, 3987, etc.
>
> I am very interested in the aggregation of URI/URN/URL/IRI grammars
> and formalization of codepoint translation tables. Does IETF have an
> XML vocabulary for expressing ABNF (RFC 5234?) grammars? I am
> presently developing machinery for grammar analysis that will be used
> to generate reference parsers, serializers, and test suites directly
> from the specification(s).

I hacked an XML export option into Bill Fenner's "BAP" (Bill's ABNF 
parser). Sources at 
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/browser/abnfparser/bap>.

> Is there a central repository of RFC XML (RFC 2629) documents? Are you

xml.resource.org has some. Are you looking for a specific one?

> ...

Best regards, Julian

Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 17:58:24 UTC