RE: IRIs [was: [Minutes] 17 Mar 2003 TAG teleconf...]

> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> Chris Lilley
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 1:41 AM
> To: Paul Grosso
> Cc: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: IRIs [was: [Minutes] 17 Mar 2003 TAG teleconf...]
>
> ...
>
> Well, I thought that was what we had told people was best current
> practice, was exactly what had been done (in for example XInclude) -
> in other words reference IRI by copy and paste, as existing specs from
> XML Namespaces to XML Schema already do, but note that this comes from
> IRI which is mature but not final, and to note - to give a heads up to
> developers - that a future erratum will modify this usage to cope with
> any changes that happen as IRI becomes finalized.
>
> ...

As a matter of fact, I don't think this is what these specs do. Referencing
IRI *properly* by "cut & paste" would mean to paste in more or less all the
normative part of the document, right? Instead, the specs try to give a
short summary, and I think that's a very bad idea.

(Personal opinion: if XML 1.1 *requires* IRIs, it must wait for them to be
ready. If it doesn't, it shouldn't use them. It *certainly* wasn't mentioned
in the XML 1.1 requirements [1]).

> ...

Julian


[1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xml-names11-req-20020403/>

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2003 03:40:17 UTC