RE: [xri] URI/IRI/XRI - what should extend what?

["Schleiff, Marty" <marty.schleiff@boeing.com>]

Hi Gabe (& All),

I'll try again.

If we say XRI is a URI scheme, then we can focus on ASCII-only. I think
we can (almost) ignore IRI and its issues, just like I think http is
oblivious to IRI.

So the folks who aren't English-speakers can use IRI to represent their
XRIs just like they use IRI to represent their http URIs.

Marty.Schleiff@boeing.com; CISSP
Associate Technical Fellow - Cyber Identity Specialist
Computing Security Infrastructure
(206) 679-5933
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gabe Wachob [mailto:gabe.wachob@amsoft.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 12:02 PM
> To: Schleiff, Marty; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [xri] URI/IRI/XRI - what should extend what?
> 
> Marty-
> 	I think you may have a misconception about all these things.
> 
> 	First, URI's are defined with US-ASCII only. If you 
> don't do US-ASCII, you don't do URI's. 
> 	So the folks who aren't Engish-speakers decided they 
> wanted to play in the URI world and so they defined IRI. IRI 
> is basically just the way of encoding the full range of UTF-8 
> characters into URI-legal strings. 
> 
> 	So if we don't leverage IRI, we just have to rewrite 
> IRI. I don't see any point in that. 
> 
> 	If you want to support XRI, you have to support the 
> full set of internationalized characters, and the easiest way 
> to do that is to use IRI libraries which are pretty 
> ubiquitous now. There are a lot of Unicode corner cases and 
> I'm fairly certain not everyone handles all of Unicode correctly.
> But this is one of those areas where 99.99% of the cases are 
> handled correctly and we should be happy with that. 
> 
> 	So, I'm not sure its really a big deal for a vendor to 
> support URI and not IRI. And if they don't want to support 
> IRI, then they *really* won't want to support XRI. 
> 
> 	-Gabe
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Schleiff, Marty [mailto:marty.schleiff@boeing.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:28 AM
> > To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: [xri] URI/IRI/XRI - what should extend what?
> > 
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > The XRI Syntax spec describes IRI as extending the character set of 
> > URI, and then describes XRI as extending the syntactic 
> elements (but 
> > not the character set) of IRI. If I were a product vendor, it would 
> > sound to me like in order to support XRI, my products would 
> first (or 
> > also) have to support IRI. I might think IRI support sounds complex 
> > with lots of implications to my install base, so if I decide not to 
> > support IRI it also means I wouldn't be supporting XRI.
> > To me it seems like IRI adds lots of complexity to XRI. I'd rather 
> > just say XRI is a URI scheme, restricted to UTF-8 like any 
> other URI. 
> > In XRI let's not even worry about other encodings. When 
> international 
> > characters are needed in an XRI, then the IRI spec deals 
> with how to 
> > do it. Let's leave the complexity in the IRI spec. Of 
> course we could 
> > include a section in the XRI Syntax spec that gives 
> examples of how to 
> > convert a URI with a scheme of xri:// into an IRI according to the 
> > steps described in RFC 3987.
> > I put this idea on the wiki (item #3.11 under XRI Syntax).
> > 
> > Marty.Schleiff@boeing.com; CISSP
> > Associate Technical Fellow - Cyber Identity Specialist Computing 
> > Security Infrastructure
> > (206) 679-5933
> 
>