[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
• From: David Tolpin <dvd@d...>
• Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 18:53:06 +0400 (AMT)
• In-reply-to: <000101c3d5f1$5ed444b0$6401a8c0@pcukmka>

> > 
> > Is there a regular expression or BNF grammar for anyURI?
> > 
> 
> Who needs a grammar? Surely this, from Schema part 2, is good enough for
> any implementor:
> 
> Each URI scheme imposes specialized syntax rules for URIs in that
> scheme, including restrictions on the syntax of allowed fragement
> identifiers. Because it is impractical for processors to check that a
> value is a context-appropriate URI reference, this specification follows
> the lead of [RFC 2396] (as amended by [RFC 2732]) in this matter: such
> rules and restrictions are not part of type validity and are not checked
> by .minimally conforming. processors. Thus in practice the above
> definition imposes only very modest obligations on .minimally
> conforming. processors.
> 
> I'm still waiting for someone to tell me exactly what the "modest
> obligations" are.

Michael,

I am emotionally on your side. However, I've tried to put something in my implementation
of the recommendation; the regular expression had been borrowed from a post on the
net which quoted a post in a private list by Alexander Falk of Altova. 

Here it is:

(([a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z+\-\.]*:)?/{0,2}[0-9a-zA-Z;/?:@&=+$\.\-_!~*'()%]+)?(#[0-9a-zA-Z;/?:@&=+$\.\-_!~*'()%]+)?

I am now wondering whether anyURI is a URI reference, and whether it is what the authors
meant?

David

• References:
  • RE: Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
• Next by Date: Urgent help needed. XML Parser
• Previous by thread: RE: Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
• Next by thread: RE: Why is xml:base a URI *reference*?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread