- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 09:32:29 -0500
- To: kpako@yahoo.com
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
I noticed something very unusual about the proposed feed URI scheme
for RSS. This is separate from previous concerns that have been
raised about the feed URI being a synonym for http. There may be a
deeper architectural principle at stake here too, which is not
currently addressed in the URI specs. Is it permissible for one
scheme to have both opaque and hierarchical forms?
The draft spec
<http://www.25hoursaday.com/draft-obasanjo-feed-URI-scheme-02.html>
states :
The following are examples of the "feed" URI scheme
feed:http://example.com/rss.xml - Identifies the RSS feed at
'http://example.com/rss.xml'
feed:https://example.com/rss.xml - Identifies the RSS feed at
'https://example.com/rss.xml'
feed://example.com/rss.xml - Identifies the RSS feed at
'http://example.com/rss.xml'
The first two examples are opaque URIs in an RFC 2396 sense. The
third is a hierarchical URI. This would certainly cause problems for
some generic URI processing code I have recently written in XOM which
I now realize has an implicit assumption that each scheme is either
opaque or heirarchical but not both. I'm not sure this is wrong
according to RFC 2396. That spec contains no clear language which
would rule this out, and at least one sentence implies that this is
POK ("It is not necessary for all URI within a given scheme to be
restricted to the <hier_part> syntax, since the hierarchical
properties of that syntax are only necessary when relative URI are
used within a particular document.") This sentence has been deleted
from the draft replacement for RFC 2396.
Regardless, this seems quite confusing and potentially problem
causing for existing software. Is it really necessary or advisable to
define a URI scheme that can be both opaque and hierarchical?
Continuing with this line of thought, the primary purpose of
hierarchical URIs is to allow relative references, but does this
really apply here? Could there be a relative reference to
feed://example.com/rss.xml ? Would this have the expected resolution?
Probably. But I expect it would be confusing to users that they could
use relative references for feed://example.com/rss.xml but not for
the opaque form feed:http://example.com/rss.xml
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@metalab.unc.edu
Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
Received on Thursday, 29 January 2004 09:56:50 UTC