[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (OFFICE-3440) ODF 1.2 CD05 Part 1Needs anyIRI datatype
[ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-3440?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=22678#action_22678 ]
Michael Brauer commented on OFFICE-3440:
----------------------------------------
Dennis: It seems that the main issue you have with "anyURI" is that it allows more than IRIs. I think this is a minor issue, and not worth risking future incompatibilities or issues that a non-standard URI/IRI definition has. I mean, the URI/IRI topic is complex, so we better use that some experts at the W3C have created than trying to create something of our own. If their definition has issues, then this is a general issues that is not restricted to ODF. We don't have to be better than other standards in this regard.
Regarding your first comment from the 25th: Am I right that this refers to the Note in the XSD specification that says: "Applications which depend on anyURI values being legal according to the rules of the relevant specifications should make arrangements to check values against the appropriate definitions of IRI, URI, and specific schemes". And am I right that you consider our uses of the anyURI datatype an "application" of that datatype. Its would be an interesting interpretation of the note, that differs from my reading of the note, since I consider an application to be a piece of software that does anything with an anyURI value. I therefore searched for the term "application" in the XSD 1.0 specification. There is no definition of it, but the other usages of the term "application" make me believe that my interpretation actually is correct.
Regarding your item 5 and 6. Your proposal is to say: "A valid anyIRI value is an anyURI value that conforms to the definition of IRI reference in [RFC3987]." What follows is that an anyIRI value that does contain a value that does not conform to RFC3987 is not a valid value, and that a document containing such a value would be invalid. What again follows is that in order to decide whether an ODF document is valid or not, the IRI references have to be checked. And this is again what the W3C note says is impracticable.
So, given that we still did not receive any input to the issue, I would suggest that we keep the ODF 1.2 specification as is. Sure, that may not be a perfect solution from your perspective. But given that many other standards are fine with the anyURI definition (and we were in ODF 1.0 and 1.1 and also ISO 26300), it doesn't seem to be a bad solution either.
> ODF 1.2 CD05 Part 1 Needs anyIRI datatype
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: OFFICE-3440
> URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-3440
> Project: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: Needs Discussion, Part 1 (Schema), Schema and Datatypes
> Affects Versions: ODF 1.2 CD 05
> Reporter: Dennis Hamilton
> Fix For: ODF 1.2 CD 06
>
>
> The rules for IRI references are slightly different than the rules for anyURI. In particular, anyURI accepts ASCII characters that are excluded from IRI references by [RFC3987].
> Rather than qualify the use of anyURI to be specific to IRIs every place that anyURI is used in the current schema, it is recommended that this be handled in one place by introducing an anyIRI datatype that is derivative of anyURI with an additional pattern constraint that eliminates the ASCII-corresponding characters that are excluded from IRI references in [RFC3987].
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]