RE: Action item on lexical space of type anyURI

Noah,

Thanks for doing this. I took that action in your absence last week, but
had not got round to fulfilling it. I was in fact, just beginning to
compose the e-mail when this arrive in my inbox.

I agree with everything you state below. I would also note ( for the
record, not for the spec ) that while both XML 1.0 and XML 1.1 allow you
to serialize the same set of URIs the serializations of some of the
members of that set differ between XML 1.0 and XML 1.1. XML 1.0 would
have to % escape the characters in attribute/element content that XML
1.1 allows but XML 1.0 does not. That is to say, XML 1.0 would have to
escape some characters in the serialized form that would be escaped by
the algorithm defined in XML Linking 5.4 for XML 1.1

Cheers

Gudge

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
> Sent: 18 May 2004 07:21
> To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Action item on lexical space of type anyURI
> 
> 
> Although I don't see it listed in the action item list, I had 
> from several
> weeks ago an action item to see whether we were at risk of loosing
> information about the lexical space of anyURI as we moved 
> from making our
> XOP schema normative to non-normative.  I note that the proposed
> recommendation version of Schema Datatypes says of this type [1]:
> 
> "The *lexical space* of anyURI is finite-length character 
> sequences which,
> when the algorithm defined in Section 5.4 of [XML Linking Language] is
> applied to them, result in strings which are legal URIs 
> according to [RFC
> 2396], as amended by [RFC 2732].
> 
> Note:  Spaces are, in principle, allowed in the *lexical 
> space* of anyURI,
> however, their use is highly discouraged (unless they are 
> encoded by %20)."
> 
> Our current editors copy of XOP says:
> 
> <current>
> "Its [normalized value] MUST be a representation of a URI 
> (see [RFC 2396])
> referencing the part of the package containing the data 
> logically included
> by the [owner element] (i.e., the xop:Include element 
> information item).
> Editorial note: HR
> XML Schema data type xs:anyURI defines an escaping mechanism 
> for characters
> disallowed in URI references. Do we want to use it? Moreover xs:anyURI
> definition refers to RFC 2396, as we do, and to RFC 2732 that 
> defines a
> format for IPv6 addresses in URIs. Do we want to add RFC 2732?  "
> </current>
> 
> I suggest we change this to:
> 
> <proposed>
> "Its [normalized value] MUST be a representation of a URI 
> (see [RFC 2396])
> referencing the part of the package containing the data 
> logically included
> by the [owner element] (i.e., the xop:Include element 
> information item).
> >The [normalized value] must be a valid lexical form of the XML Schema
> anyURI datatype (ref to XML Schema Datatypes#anyURI).<
> </proposed>
> 
> In other words, while we do not provide a normative schema or require
> validation for the overall XOP envelope, we I propose that we 
> do continue
> to appeal to XML schema datatypes for the definition of URIs.
> 
> I believe this fulfills the action that was assigned me.  
> Apologies for the
> long delay.
> 
> Noah
> 
> [1] 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
> --------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2004 10:37:32 UTC