- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 10:47:58 -0400
- To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
At 9:09 AM -0700 10/9/02, Jonathan Marsh wrote: >The XML Activity has been fairly enthusiastic in adopting IRIs [1] >(under various nomenclature). In particular, we have encouraged users >to put IRIs in XML documents, and described how such IRIs can be >converted to URIs consumable by legacy URI processors and resolvers. > The IRI spec is still a draft, and subject to change. The current draft expires at the end of the year. It is unacceptable for a finished spec such as XLink to depend on a mutable draft. (In fact, I don't think XLink does. I think the claim that an XLink href attribute contains an IRI is inaccurate. More on that in another message.) While IRIs seem like a good idea in theory, until the IRI spec is actually finished, it is impossible to test this in practice. Other specifications that are beyond working draft status should use URIs exclusively. Alternately, a spec should wait for IRIs to be finished before advancing to candidate recommendation. -- +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer | +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) | | http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ | | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ | | Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2002 10:49:34 UTC