Fwd: [ANN] XML::Atom::Syndication v0.9

[A. Pagaltzis]

I’ve trimmed Timothy’s message to the part of particular interest
for this group; the full announcement can be found at
http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/perl-xml/3065090

>From: "Timothy Appnel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [ANN] XML::Atom::Syndication v0.9
>
>Lastly, if you are interested in Atom development with Perl or
>looking for assistance with one of these implementations I've
>opened the atomic-perl mailing list here:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] or
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atomic-perl/

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // 

Rob Sayre banned from posting to the lists for 30 days

[Paul Hoffman]

Because of his recent ad hominem attacks on WG members, I have 
temporarily suspended Rob Sayre's posting privileges for the two 
Atompub WG mailing list for 30 days, as specified in RFC 3934. If you 
have questions or comments about this action, please first take them 
to Tim and me offline.


--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium

Re: Atom syndication schema

[Thomas Broyer]

2006/3/15, Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Just to be pedantic, URIs (RFC 3986) are in pure US-ASCII. IRIs (RFC
> 3987) are in Unicode and are accepted by Atom (so, Atom's URIs seem to
> be actually IRIs). The standard says:

Well, not really the "standard" actually, since the RNC is not normative...

># Unconstrained; it's not entirely clear how IRI fit into
># xsd:anyURI so let's not try to constrain it here
>atomUri = text

RFC 3987 says (section 1.2 Applicability):
   For example, XML schema [XMLSchema] has an explicit type
   "anyURI" that includes IRIs and IRI references. Therefore, IRIs
   and IRI references can be in attributes and elements of type
   "anyURI".

So, actually, it seems that the Atom RNC could say "atomUri = xs:anyURI".

...or RFC 3987 is wrong... (I didn't check XMLSchema to try to figure
it out myself)

--
Thomas Broyer

Re: Atom syndication schema

[M. David Peterson]

> Also note, that atom:uri is an IRI-reference, so it is affected by any
xml:base attributes on that element. <

Until now, I had no idea this was the case... WOW!!! Amazing the
things you can learn around people who know what theyre talking about.
:)


On 3/15/06, David Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Wednesday, March 15, 2006, 3:21:08 AM, Martin Duerst wrote:
>
> > For atom:uri and atom:email at least, not having xml:lang may
> > be seen as a feature.
>
> The spec says that "Any element defined by this specification MAY have
> an xml:lang attribute". We chose to limit the effects of xml:lang,
> rather than the occurrence of it. Eg: atom:published is allowed
> xml:lang, even though it is meaningless. The spec includes a sentence
> about element xxx being "Language-Sensitive" when we consider the
> language to be relevant. The idea is, if a feed reading framework such
> as Microsoft's Windows/IE7 feed platform doesn't preserve xml:lang on
> elements that aren't "Language-Sensitive", then they are doing nothing
> wrong. Same for, eg: an Atom publishing server backed by a legacy CMS.
>
> > While these often contain pieces from one language or another, they
> > are not really in a language.
>
> I agree. Note that this is the case in Atom, because those two
> elements are not "Language-Sensitive".
>
>
> Also note, that atom:uri is an IRI-reference, so it is affected by any
> xml:base attributes on that element.
>
> And that atomCommonAttributes also covers extension attributes, which
> are also allowed anywhere. They are "undefined", which *I* think means
> that implementations need not feel bad about dropping them on the
> floor. The official meaning is, er, undefined.
>
>
> --
> Dave
>
>


--


M. David Peterson
http://www.xsltblog.com/

Re: Atom syndication schema

[David Powell]

Wednesday, March 15, 2006, 3:21:08 AM, Martin Duerst wrote:

> For atom:uri and atom:email at least, not having xml:lang may
> be seen as a feature.

The spec says that "Any element defined by this specification MAY have
an xml:lang attribute". We chose to limit the effects of xml:lang,
rather than the occurrence of it. Eg: atom:published is allowed
xml:lang, even though it is meaningless. The spec includes a sentence
about element xxx being "Language-Sensitive" when we consider the
language to be relevant. The idea is, if a feed reading framework such
as Microsoft's Windows/IE7 feed platform doesn't preserve xml:lang on
elements that aren't "Language-Sensitive", then they are doing nothing
wrong. Same for, eg: an Atom publishing server backed by a legacy CMS.

> While these often contain pieces from one language or another, they
> are not really in a language.

I agree. Note that this is the case in Atom, because those two
elements are not "Language-Sensitive".


Also note, that atom:uri is an IRI-reference, so it is affected by any
xml:base attributes on that element.

And that atomCommonAttributes also covers extension attributes, which
are also allowed anywhere. They are "undefined", which *I* think means
that implementations need not feel bad about dropping them on the
floor. The official meaning is, er, undefined.


-- 
Dave

Re: Atom syndication schema

[M. David Peterson]

Excellent!  Thanks for the info :)

I will have to go back and see what exactly the article I read was
refering to, but if I remember correctly they seemed to mention that
support for the top level domains, specifically .com, .net, and .cn
had not been implemented using the Mandarin character set.

Either way, obviously there are a lot of considerations that need to
be allowed for when developing from an interanational perspective,
something that should be part of the defaul process instead of the
exception... of course, I say this mainly because this is really the
first time I have put any real thought into this area, and obviously I
need to put a lot more.

Thanks again for clearing things up and providing the links!

On 3/15/06, Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 10:36:36PM -0700,
>  M. David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>  a message of 43 lines which said:
>
> > As long as your character set for any given feed is properly set, it
> > seems to me then all the information necessary to properly decode
> > the email and URI (in which the work continues to integrate support
> > for non-latin based languages, such as Mandarin, etc...
>
> Just to be pedantic, URIs (RFC 3986) are in pure US-ASCII. IRIs (RFC
> 3987) are in Unicode and are accepted by Atom (so, Atom's URIs seem to
> be actually IRIs). The standard says:
>
>   # Unconstrained; it's not entirely clear how IRI fit into
>   # xsd:anyURI so let's not try to constrain it here
>   atomUri = text
>
> > if I understand things correctly, full support for Mandarin
> > Chinese-based domains in not far off (speaking in terms of DNS
> > support and such).
>
> It is quite old, RFC 3490 (issued three years ago and implemented even
> before).
>
> > email adresses encoded as mentioned
>
> There is not yet any standard for Unicode email addresses (work is
> going on, see the very recent IETF Working Group EAI
> http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/eai-charter.html).
>


--


M. David Peterson
http://www.xsltblog.com/

Re: Atom syndication schema

[Stephane Bortzmeyer]

On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 10:36:36PM -0700,
 M. David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote 
 a message of 43 lines which said:

> As long as your character set for any given feed is properly set, it
> seems to me then all the information necessary to properly decode
> the email and URI (in which the work continues to integrate support
> for non-latin based languages, such as Mandarin, etc...

Just to be pedantic, URIs (RFC 3986) are in pure US-ASCII. IRIs (RFC
3987) are in Unicode and are accepted by Atom (so, Atom's URIs seem to
be actually IRIs). The standard says:

   # Unconstrained; it's not entirely clear how IRI fit into
   # xsd:anyURI so let's not try to constrain it here
   atomUri = text

> if I understand things correctly, full support for Mandarin
> Chinese-based domains in not far off (speaking in terms of DNS
> support and such).

It is quite old, RFC 3490 (issued three years ago and implemented even
before).

> email adresses encoded as mentioned 

There is not yet any standard for Unicode email addresses (work is
going on, see the very recent IETF Working Group EAI
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/eai-charter.html).

Re: Atom syndication schema

[Stephane Bortzmeyer]

On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 10:23:55PM -0800,
 Walter Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote 
 a message of 29 lines which said:

> xml:lang isn't enough information to sort out given name and family
> name.

Yes! In many countries, the order changed. In France, one century ago
"Family-name Given-name" was common in official papers but is now
deprecated. In Algeria, a former french colony, the two usages still
prevail ("Matoub Lounes" or "Lounes Matoub"?)