Re: escaping % in RDF URI references

My reading on this issue indicates that it is a mess.

My guess is that the intent is to make RDF URI references be absolute IRIs
with optional fragment identifiers.  This intent is, however, almost
impossible to decipher, even with the ``compatability with IRI'' note.

The wording in the ``Namespaces in XML 1.1'' document is *much*
preferable.  It lays out the intent, gives reasons why the intent cannot
be specified with just a pointer, provides a temporary solution, and
finally gives a way towards a permanent solution.  

Why isn't the same route taken in RDF concepts?  I don't view the current
test in RDF Concepts as acceptable.

peter

PS:  It appears to me that the translation in RDF Concepts is different
from the translation in Namespaces in XML 1.1.  In particular, RDF concepts
allows control characters whereas Namespaces in XML 1.1 does not.


From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Re: escaping % in RDF URI references
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 17:52:44 +0300

> 
> > It appears to me that RDF Concepts does not require % to be %-escaped in
> > RDF URI references (Section 6.4).  Surely this is a bug.
> 
> Hi Peter
> 
> In response to your message
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0282
> 
> The requirement to not escape % is derived from the the other specifications 
> from which the text you mention is taken.
> 
> See,
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-charmod-20030822/#sec-URIs
> 
> which links to
> http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-2e-errata#E26
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink/#link-locators
> http://www.w3.org/International/2002/draft-duerst-iri-00.txt
> 
> The grammar in 
> http://www.w3.org/International/2002/draft-duerst-iri-00.txt
> 
> is perhaps the most useful, this indicates that % is only allowed in IRIs when 
> part of an escape sequence, and not otherwise.
> 
> Thus
> 
> <rdf:RDF>
>   <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/bar%foo">
>     <eg:prop>val</eg:prop>
>   </rdf:Description>
> </rdf:RDF>
> 
> is not legal, whereas
> 
> <rdf:RDF>
>   <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/foo%bar">
>     <eg:prop>val</eg:prop>
>   </rdf:Description>
> </rdf:RDF>
> 
> is legal (but does not represent an IRI in UTF-8 encoding).
> 
> In a discussion of your comment, the RDF Core WG was inclined to add one or 
> more test cases (e.g. these two) and make no other changes.
> Would that satisfy you? If so I will formally propose these tests and get back 
> to you once they have been added to the RDF test suite.
> 
> If you believe that the design choice is fundamentally mistaken I believe that 
> it would be more effective to take that up with the IRI editors, perhaps on 
> uri@w3.org or w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org
>  
> Jeremy
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 9 September 2003 06:14:41 UTC