Proposal for LC303 (was: What are the exemptions for use of IRI? )

If that's the case, I propose to add the following paragraph to the end
of section 1.3 "Notational Conventions"

	The core specification of WSDL 2.0 supports Internationalized
Resource Identifiers or IRIs [add reference to
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987 <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987>
<http://www.w3.org/International/articles/idn-and-iri/> ].  IRIs are a
superset of URIs with added support for internationalization. The URI
syntax [add reference to http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986
<http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986> ] only allows the use of  a small set
of characters, including upper and lower case letters of the English
alphabet, European numerals and a few symbols. IRIs  allow the use of
characters from a wider range of language scripts.  
	 
	For simplification, examples throughout this primer only use
URIs.  If you are interested in the use of IRIs, you might want to read
the paper [add reference to
http://www.w3.org/International/articles/idn-and-iri/
<http://www.w3.org/International/articles/idn-and-iri/> ] prepared by
the W3C Internationalization Activity [add link to
http://www.w3.org/International/ <http://www.w3.org/International/> ]. 
	 

Alternatively, If people are concerned that use of IRI is not really a
"notational convention", we may add a subsection under "Introduction"
for "Use of URI and IRI" with the same content as above. The new
structure of section 1 now looks like
1. Introduction
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-primer-20050803/#Introduction> 
    1.1 Prerequisites
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-primer-20050803/#Prerequisites> 
    1.2 Structure of this Primer
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-primer-20050803/#PrimerStructure> 
    1.3 Use of URI and IRI
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-primer-20050803/#notation> 
    1.4 Notational Conventions
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-primer-20050803/#notation> 
 2. WSDL 2.0 Basics
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-primer-20050803/#basics> 
...
 

Best Regards,
Kevin
  

 



________________________________

	From: Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com] 
	Sent: Tuesday, Sep 20, 2005 7:50 AM
	To: Liu, Kevin; Hugo Haas
	Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
	Subject: RE: What are the exemptions for use of IRI?
	
	

	IIRC, the WG was not prepared to do a global search and replace
of URI for IRI in the primer, as URIs are a familiar concept and in
almost all cases in the Primer the term is good enough.  Having one
statement pointing out that our use of URI instead of IRI is a
simplification should be sufficient.  We can confirm this on this week's
call if I've misrepresented the WG's decision.

	 

	
________________________________


	From: Liu, Kevin [mailto:kevin.liu@sap.com] 
	Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 5:25 PM
	To: Hugo Haas; Jonathan Marsh
	Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
	Subject: What are the exemptions for use of IRI?

	 

	Hi Hugo, Hi Jonathan,

	 

	While working on proposing changes to the primer to implement
your suggestions in LC303 [1], I realize that we may also need to do a
global search in the Primer to replace the term URI with IRI to be
consistent with the core spec, in addition to adding a brief
introduction to IRI as you suggested.

	 

	However, I  notice that the resolution of LC74a [2] , which
caused the URI to IRI changes in Part 1 and 2,  contains a few
exemptions. The resolution of LC74a says <quote>Change URI to IRI
throughout except URI attr and prop on featiures and properties and SOAP
module, which becomes "ref"; exempt appendix E where we talk about
namespace URIs, and section 4.11.2 in adjunct spec.</quote>.  

	 

	It's not clear to me what the last two exemptions really are
since section "Appendix E" and "section 4.11.2 in adjunct specs" are
completely changed/removed in the current version of the spec. In
particular,

		*	If I recall it right, the former Part 1
appendix E is now part of the Primer section 5.6 [3] which talks about
namespace URIs.   Does the exemption for "Appendix E" in LC74a mean that
namespace URI should not be changed to IRI? if so, why? 
		*	I have no idea what the "adjunct section 4.11.2"
was, do you know what  the exemption for "section 4.11.2" is? 

	[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/lc-issues/#LC303

	[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC74a
	[3]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-primer-20050803/#adv-notes-on-uris

	Best Regards,
	Kevin
	  

	 

		 

		
________________________________


		From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh
		Sent: Thursday, Sep 08, 2005 10:00 AM
		To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
		Subject: Minutes, 8 Sep 2005 WS Description WG telcon

		Encl.

		 

		--  Jonathan Marsh  --  jmarsh@microsoft.com
<mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com>   --
http://spaces.msn.com/members/auburnmarshes/
<http://spaces.msn.com/members/auburnmarshes/>   --