- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:07:52 -0700
- To: "John Aldridge" <john.aldridge@informatix.co.uk>, <michaelm@netsol.com>
- Cc: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>, <XML-uri@w3.org>
My two statements are completely consistent: It is fully acceptable but not required for any parser to know about specific URI schemes and their normalization rules. What is the problem? Henrik > -----Original Message----- > From: John Aldridge [mailto:john.aldridge@informatix.co.uk] > Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 09:59 > To: Frystyk; michaelm@netsol.com > Cc: Simon St.Laurent; XML-uri@w3.org > Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-daigle-uri-std-00.txt > > > At 09:05 07/09/00 -0700, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote: > > > Do you go further and say that XSLT (which matches elements > > > and attributes > > > based on their namespaces being the same) must therefore use this > > > definition of equivalence? I.e. two QNames match if their > > > namespace URIs > > > are byte-for-byte identical and their local parts are the same? > > > > > > Again, I agree, but Henrik Frystyk Nielsen (at least) has > > > expressed the > > > view that this is not what the relevant RFCs/RECs say (or > > > what they should > > > say). > > > >That is over-simplifying what I stated - in [1], I said that > > > > 1) The generator of a name has the responsiblity to > > know the semantics of the URI space that she is using > > > > 2) It is sufficient if a basic consumer only uses > > octet-by-octet comparison taking into account relative > > URIs. However, it is also fully acceptable for the > > consumer to know about special normalization rules of a > > URI space and apply those if so desired. > > > >which I further elaborated on in [2] mentioning the > responsibilities of > >the party generating the document and the party consuming > the document. > > > >Henrik > > > >[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-uri/2000Jun/0721.html > >[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-uri/2000Jun/0739.html > > I was referring to the following exchange > > Me: > > >You are saying, then, that the XPath REC should permit, _but > not require_, > >XPath implementations (including XSLT) to normalise NSURIs > in a scheme > >dependent manner when comparing names? > > Henrik: > > >You can not require them to do that just as well as you can > not require > >them to know about a particular namespace. > > Me: > > >This can clearly result in a given XML source/XSLT > stylesheet combination > >producing different results depending on the normalisations > performed by > >the particular XPath implementation. > > Henrik: > > >If you don't want that possibility then don't use a URI > space that has > >this behavior - it is up to you, see [1]. > > -- > Cheers, > John >
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2000 13:07:06 UTC