- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 13:28:53 -0400
- To: John Bradley <john.bradley@wingaa.com>
- Cc: "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, www-tag@w3.org
We agree, or at least we appear to: the empty string is legal as an IRI Reference and as a URI Reference. The empty string is also a member of the value and lexical spaces of the XSD anyURI datatype. The the empty string is also legal as the value of a namespace declaration in XML, that string is a distinguished value that is in fact used to cancel the corresponding prefix binding. Accordingly, there are no namespaces named with the empty string. > Relative and "empty string" IRI are certainly valid IRI, the > question is if they are valid "anyURI" in XML 1.1? I assume you mean XSD 1.1? The specification says [1]: "The ·lexical space· of anyURI is the set of possibly empty finite-length character sequences." Earlier it says: "[Definition:] anyURI represents an Internationalized Resource Identifier Reference (IRI). An anyURI value can be absolute or relative, and may have an optional fragment identifier (i.e., it may be an IRI Reference). This type should be used when the value fulfills the role of an IRI, as defined in [RFC 3987] or its successor(s) in the IETF Standards Track. " So, >any< sequence of characters, including the empty sequence, is a legal xsd:anyURI. The specification says that anyURI >should< be applied when the string represents an IRI reference. Conformance to IRI ref. syntax is thus strongly encouraged, but not enforced by the datatype. > I discounted that as perhaps being non-normative given the > draft status and the other document. If we're discussing XSD 1.1, then [1] is as authoritative a source as you'll find. The only Recommendation-level version of XSD is 1.0 [2]. That version did try to enforce conformance to (pre-) IRI syntax, but clearly allows for relative and thus for empty forms. I think there's very little question that XSD anyURI, whether 1.0 or 1.1, allows for IRIs (perhaps modulo some edge cases in 1.0 as you say that you and DaveO uncovered some), allows for relative IRIs, and thus allows for the empty string. We agree that the empty string is not and never has been usable as the name for an XML namespace. Noah [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#anyURI [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PER-xmlschema-2-20040318/#anyURI -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 -------------------------------------- John Bradley <john.bradley@wingaa.com> 08/06/2008 12:32 PM To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com cc: "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, www-tag@w3.org Subject: Re: Boeing XRI Use Cases Hi Noah, I don't claim to e an XML 1.1 expert. I was looking at Sec 2.2 of xml-names11: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/ > 2.2 Use of IRIs as Namespace Names > The empty string, though it is a legal IRI reference, cannot be used > as a namespace name. > > The use of relative IRI references, including same-document > references, in namespace declarations is deprecated. > > Note: > > This deprecation of relative URI references was decided on by a W3C > XML Plenary Ballot [Relative URI deprecation]. It also declares that > "later specifications such as DOM, XPath, etc. will define no > interpretation for them". > I should have used "empty string" rather than null. There seems to be a conflict between the two documents. The reference to relative IRI XML schema re 3.3.18 of xmlschema11-2 is in a [Definition:] I discounted that as perhaps being non-normative given the draft status and the other document. Relative and "empty string" IRI are certainly valid IRI, the question is if they are valid "anyURI" in XML 1.1? It is worth someone having a look at, but probably someone closer to it than me. However I don't think it is particularly relevant to XRI though I suppose that relative XRI would also be prohibited according to xml- names1.1. I don't think I am going to lose sleep over that:) The XRI specs don't rely on any new functionality in XML 1.1. Regards John Bradley OASIS IDTRUST-SC http://xri.net/=jbradley 五里霧中 On 6-Aug-08, at 7:29 AM, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: > John Bradley writes: > >> The definition of "anyURI" changes slightly to include the >> mapping of http: IRI according to RFC3987 This allows for the >> ireg-name component to be mapped via RFC3490 for schemes using >> domain names. > > OK, good. > >> In XML schema 1.1 that is almost done [http://www.w3. >> org/TR/xmlschema11-2/] > >> [...] allows almost all http: scheme IRI to work as "anyURI", >> relative and null IRI are excluded so it is still a sub set, >> though a much larger one than before. > > Hmm, I don't see where relative or "null" are excluded. The > specification for that datatype says [1]: > > "[Definition:] anyURI represents an Internationalized Resource > Identifier Reference (IRI). An anyURI value can be absolute >>or > relative<<, and may have an optional fragment identifier (i.e., it > may be > an IRI Reference)." > > Was there something else you meant when you said that "relative [is] > excluded"? I read this as explicitly allowing relative. As to "null" > IRIs, the word null does not appear in RFC 3987 [1] or in RFC 3986 > [2] for > that matter, but RFC 3987 includes the following grammar: > > IRI-reference = IRI / irelative-ref > > irelative-ref = irelative-part [ "?" iquery ] [ "#" ifragment ] > > irelative-part = "//" iauthority ipath-abempty > / ipath-absolute > / ipath-noscheme > / ipath-empty > > ipath-empty = 0<ipchar> > > This seems to me to indicate that an IRI Reference, as required by XML > Schema 1.1, can indeed be an ipath-empty, I.e. the null string. Am I > still missing something? > > Noah > > [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt > [2] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt > > -------------------------------------- > Noah Mendelsohn > IBM Corporation > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > 1-617-693-4036 > -------------------------------------- > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2008 17:28:12 UTC