> W3C XML Schema is quite clear that both are valid... The underlying
> assumption is that application will normalize spaces (like the XPath
> normalize-space function would do) before using any value that is from a
> datatype that strip spaces.
Which is about where the Atom group are. Just trying to find some
text to clarify that underlying assumption.
The claim
>
> If you agree with this assumption, that means that the value doesn't
> need to be a valid URI before normalization.... If not, use another
> type!
That's where I'm stuck Eric. I don't know where to start looking
for an alternative type![1]
>
> Also note that this isn't the only difference between the RFC and the
> datatype:
>
> The ·lexical space· of anyURI is finite-length character sequences
> which, when the algorithm defined in Section 5.4 of [XML Linking
> Language] is applied to them, result in strings which are legal URIs
> according to [RFC 2396], as amended by [RFC 2732].
Put simply, I don't understand that statement. Sorry Eric.
Are spaces included in the character sequence or not?
>
> Also, well known URIs (including WEBDAV) wouldn't be valid according the
> RFC and (all|some)? implementations have relaxed these conditions:
>
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/relax-ng/200111/msg00033.html
Interesting thread.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/relax-ng/200111/msg00039.html
in particular.
[1]
(Ignoring any errors)
Is the regex there a good approximation to your statement Eric?
I.e. No spaces.
regards DaveP
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "rng-users" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
