I was catching up on
back email and noticed this hadn’t received a response. See ###
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2006 3:22
Subject: [xri] Some XRI schema
Hi all. This weekend I finally got back to doing
some XRI coding, and was adding unit tests to XRI4R (hopefully soon to be
release Ruby library for XRI, XRD, and XDI manipulation). I had coded the items
in the schema that are xrd:URIPattern as Strings, and changed that to return a
URI by parsing them with URI.parse(el.text), since schema has them as xs:anyURI.
It raised exceptions as it should since the XRDs I'm working with have XRIs in
those elements not URI-friendly HXRIs.
Q1. Am I working with invalid XRDs
or should there be a xrd:anyXRI and accompanying xrd:XRIPattern?
### No, the elements
that contain XRIs use the xs:anyURI datatype. For this, as long as an XRI value
has the “xri:” prefix, it should work fine.
Q2. Also, in looking at schema again it seems
that <XRD /> is a valid XRD (other than @id, see Q4 below). Is that
intended to signify an unresolvable XRI? I thought that was done with a status
code on XRD/Status.
### No, it’s allowed
via the schema. We wanted to do that as some uses of XRDs (outside of XRI
resolution) may wish to allow totally empty ones.
Q3. If there is a minimum set of elements (my
guess would be query, status)?
### Not by the schema.
XRI resolution does specify that certain elements are required for certain
responses, but that’s application logic and not schema
Q4. Schema seems to require existence of an id
attribute on XRD, but no XRDs I've seen have that. Outdated XRDs, or does id
attribute need to be tagged with use="optional"?
### Good question. I
think it should be optional. Gabe?
From: Drummond Reed [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sat 12/16/2006 12:06 AM
Minutes: XRI TC Telecon Thursday 2006-12-14
Following are the
minutes for the unofficial XRI TC telecon at:
Date: Thursday, 14
December 2006 USA (Friday
Time: 4:00PM - 5:30PM
Weekly unofficial call that will continue until
the end of the XRI 2.0
1) XRI $ DICTIONARY ISSUES
The editors gave a
progress report and brought up some issues around the use
of code within the
# LAURIE to upload notes from last week's XRI $ Dictionary
f2f attended by
Laurie, Gabe, Marty, and Drummond.
* In the V2.0
dictionary, code samples will be used only for documentation.
pointed out that if the code is executable in any form (therefore
mobile code, then that would trigger special requirements. There
consensus that we don't want to consider those requirements.
discussed the possibility of using regular expressions instead of
code, but they are harder to work with.
# GABE AND LAURIE have the action
item to determine which scripting or
or Perl) should be used within the
2) XRI SYNTAX
Drummond reported on discussions he had at Internet Identity Workshop
week with several TC members (Victor, Gabe, Laurie, Marty)
current XRI 2.0 cycle outstanding issues. He had not had time to
proposals yet. They should be ready by next week's
XRI RESOLUTION ISSUES
We discussed the new issues (#37, #38, #39)
We had a very long discussion of issues #37 and #39, including the
of whether URIs should be part of the XRI resolution graph, for
values of XRDS Ref elements or CanonicalIDs. There was no clear
but the preference was not to extend the XRI resolution graph.
* On issue
#37, we analyzed if an XRI resolution request for an XRI with a
which specifies a return type of application/xrds+xml or
could return an XRDS or XRD document describing the
resource identified by
the local part and not an XRDS or XRD document
describing the authority. This
is a classic "meta" problem because you are
using an XRDS document to
describe the retreival of an XRDS document.
* No clear solution was
identified, however the XRI resolution editors will
think further on it and
make a proposal via the