[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xdi] abbreviation mechanism for XRI's
Just noted colons in suggested rules below, perhaps "|"
instead.
From: Barnhill William
[mailto:barnhill_william@bah.com]
Sent: Thu 6/30/2005 3:21 PM To: xdi@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xdi] abbreviation mechanism for XRI's Thanks Dave. I see how we can
use xrefs to reference a segment group within the XRI, though that also might be
prone to cycles. I don't immediately see how to use xrefs to delineate a
segment group within an XRI and preserve the semantic meaning of the XRI.
You, Drummond, et al. know XRIs way better than I do, any ideas?
Also, is there a XRI 2.1 or 2.0a rev
planned, and is there any possibility of the ref production going
from
xref =
"(" (XRI-reference / IRI) ")"
to
xref =
"(" (XRI-reference / IRI / "(" (label [":" XRI-Authority ) ")" )
")"
or perhaps the more easier to read
version
xref =
"(" (XRI-reference / IRI / lref ) ")" lref = "(" (label
[":" XRI-Authority ) ")" I would need a yacc run to make sure this parses without ambiguity.
If anyone has a yacc or similar xri grammar and wants to try the change I'd
appreciate it, as I won't be able to set that up until later this
weekend.
Which brings up another XRI question:
is xri:(foo*bar)*baz/ equivalent to xri:foo*bar*baz/ ?
How about xri:foo*(bar*baz)/ equivalent to xri:foo*bar*baz/
?
This kind of brings to mind the previous discussion on an algebra
for XRI/XDI, but that's for another day.
Bill
From: Dave McAlpin
[mailto:Dave.McAlpin@epok.net] Sent: Thu 6/30/2005 1:50 PM To: Barnhill William; xdi@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xdi] abbreviation mechanism for XRI's I agree with your analysis, i.e. square brackets and braces aren’t available and can’t be used. The only legal characters are in the xri-sub-delims production, and none of those are “balanced”, like parens or brackets. I think your only option is to use some form of cross-reference.
Dave
From: Barnhill
William [mailto:barnhill_william@bah.com]
I did a little digging into the XRI 2.0 and IRI specs.
"[" and "]" Are xri-gen-delims, which does mean they are currently reserved, so this would require an XRI spec mod. However, XRI makes no use of these chars, they're marked as xri-gen-delims as they are reserved in IRI.
Their use within IRI is for IP literals (ie. for IPv6+). With that in mind "[" are prob out. Perhaps "{" "}", which are not covered under XRI or IRI. Of course then we have the problem of readability between "{}" and "()". Brackets would be ideal, but then XDI addresses would not be XRIs, or XRIs would not be IRIs, neither of which are acceptable I'd think.
Another option, though somewhat ugly is ((label:oneormoresegments)) which also makes the grouping looking like a special kind of cross-reference, which in a very loose sense it would seem to be. The following would reference the labelled segments ((label)). This may be the most workable as ")" is a xri-sub-delim, and it may be in line with our current use of "(", though I'm leary of making "("'s meaning depend on the character that follows it.
Bill Barnhill Senior Consultant (XML, Emerging Technologies, Web Services, Java) Booz | Allen | Hamilton phone:+1.315.330.7386
From:
ad@ootao.com [mailto:ad@ootao.com]
Cool idea. $type is already one of our "default dollar
words" by virtue of -- |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]