Julian Reschke wrote: > > James Cerra wrote: > >>> Ian Davis wrote: >>> >>>> Graham wrote: >>>> That to me is demonstrates a very clear intention of the working group >>>> that the content must be exactly equal to the IRI. Changing this to >>>> allow whitespace would represent a major technical change to the >>>> format. I will figuratively lie down in the road if anyone suggests >>>> whitespace should be allowed around any machine-read content (uris, >>>> @type, @rel, etc). >>> >>> Leading and trailing whitespace should be stripped from the content >>> of an atom:id element. >>> >>> The two examples that Bill gave WILL happen in the wild and Atom >>> consumers will just deal with it by stripping the whitespace anyway >>> despite what the spec says now. I think this should be endorsed in >>> the spec for interoperability. >> >> +1. But Sam Ruby's first draft at [1] demostrated more than just >> atom:id. (He >> changed it now so that the examples don't have white space showing! >> lol!) They >> also included things like: >> >> <id> >> http://example.com/ >> </id> >> >> <updated> >> 2003-12-13T18:30:02Z >> </updated> >> >> Neither of those are strictly legal, since white space is illegal in >> both IRI >> and RFC 3339 (dates) I think. However they are legal with the Relax >> NG grammer >> used. > > Why would they be legal with the RNG grammar????
>From <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dt-whiteSpace>: For all ·atomic· datatypes other than string (and types ·derived· by ·restriction· from it) the value of whiteSpace is collapse and cannot be changed by a schema author; for string the value of whiteSpace is preserve; for any type ·derived· by ·restriction· from string the value of whiteSpace can be any of the three legal values. That being said, the RNC grammar for atom contains: atomId = element atom:id { atomCommonAttributes, (atomUri) } # Unconstrained; it's not entirely clear how IRI fit into # xsd:anyURI so let's not try to constrain it here atomUri = text - Sam Ruby
