W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

RE: Clarification of charmod-uri

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 15:24:13 +0100
To: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Aaron Swartz" <me@aaronsw.com>, "RDF Core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDGEOECDAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

Thanks Brian

It feels somewhat bad mannered to ask for your reasons and then try and
rebutt them, but I guess that's the process ...

> >debate in telecon and e-mail. I would particularly like to hear from Jos
> >and Brian as to why they voted against.
> 1.  I see this as a change.
> 2.  No case for making this change has been made.

I think that a clear case has been made for the need for clarification.
A case has been made for making this change^H^H^H^H^Hlarification; however
you have not found it compelling.

> 3.  I am wary of building on other specs that are not stable and well
>      understood.  I see no strong advantage to RDF in supporting this
>      now and it increases our risks.

I agree, and I am not advocating building on the IRI spec for that reason.
I believe that RDF Core has responsibilities to the international community
which cannot be addressed simply by saying that the IRI spec is not cooked
so we will leave things vague.
I think this decision does need to be backed up by comments on Charmod, IRI
draft (and XML 1.1 vis-a-vis namespace identifiers) that indicate where we
are going and getting consensus around that.

> 4.  As most implemenations don't support it now, it will decrease
>      interoperability

interoperability of US-ASCII URIs is not impacted.
There is no current interoperability of non US-ASCII URIs because no spec
indicates whether upper case or lower case % escaping should be done.

> 5.  This is pushing our charter; it violates the closest thing I have to
>      a principal for what is in and what is out of charter

I think this reflects item 2. You find the need for clarification less than
compelling; hence you have doubts about whether this is in-scope.

> There is no strong reason to do it now.  There are disadvantages to doing
> it now.  Don't do it now.

If we are convinced that this change is right, it costs less to make the
change now than in the future.

> Brian

Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 10:24:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:12 UTC