http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jun/0251.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jun/0252.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jun/0254.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jun/0256.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jun/0278.html
As a summary of what might need changing in the spec, I highlight these paragraphs (from message 0256 above):
A machine-checkable criterion should probably be defined to be a criterion the conformance to which is a decidable problem (in the computer science sense) given a document (Content-Type and finite byte stream) and the knowledge embodied in the spec and the normative references. That is, the program computing whether a given document conforms to a criterion should not be required to consult outside resources and should not embody arbitrary knowledge that isn't part of the spec (with normative references).
However, I also wrote:
As a side note: For extra usefulness, a checker can have knowledge about particular URI scheme-specific requirements. Different choices here cause a theoretical problem. If we want to remove the theoretical problem, the spec could enumerate a closed list of URI schemes that conformance checkers must know about. (Forbidding the application of knowledge about common schemes like http, https and mailto would be silly.)
-- Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
