Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Namespaces, Xml Schema Whitespace normalization, xs:anyURI
 > I agree that the uri of the example is a valid > xs:anyURI following the specs. And also that > this might be problematic. > > About the namespace name being an URI or > an xs:anyURI or simply a string, I am not sure, > parsers will be ok with any not empty > xml characters sequence as namespace "uri", > right ? There are tests in the XML Test suite that check specifically for URI validation. I see that Mike Kay just responded saying the exact opposite... and when I am not sure about something I defer to people like Michael Kay. Checking the Namespaces in XML 1.1 rec confirms this: "To conform to this specification, a processor MUST report violations of namespace well-formedness, with the exception that it is not REQUIRED to check that namespace names are legal IRIs." *sigh* > I was thinking more to the case of > xs:anyURI as base type for an URL type > like the href attribute of html, to give > the idea. > Isn't the schema supposed to stay between > the xml and my application ? I mean as user > someone that writes an xml document, > for application I mean a program that uses the > xml of the user together with a > schema-enabled-processor that provides > the program a datatyped value, > for example a number that can be summed or > a space collapsed text etc. I see where you are coming from, but a schema can be used for a variety of different things in the XML landscape. I think we are agreeing here. > For a form or an editor I agree that > url-encoding of characters should be > made by the (input) application. > > I think a reasonable option > could be that the schema does not touch > the uri so that -is responsability of the > application to build the uri, maximum > that can be given is trimming-. Many people would insert a comment about your use of "reasonable option" and "XML Schema" in the same sentence :). I agree it would be reasonable to expect that, but like others have pointed out... namespaces/uris and there use throughout XML has lots of warts. > > Otherwise I don't know how can help > a validator that, if I have an url like this: > > <http://example.org/I%20have%20space> > > tells me that these are all valid lexicals > representations of that url: > > "http://example.org/I%20have%20space" > "http://example.org/I%20have space" > "http://example.org/I%20have space" > "http://example.org/I%20have space" > > > I cannot distinguish between a valid uri > like the first one and the others > (with a space) that are really wrong. > > If is data coming from an other app, > I think there is something wrong with > the application that produces uris like > the last ones, but I cannot check it with > the schema, I have to do it my self > when the schema tells me they are valid. > > At the same time the only benefit that the > user has is to have the space character escaped, > all the other characters must anyway > be escaped by him or his input application, > and also consecutive spaces. > > May be there is some other use or apect > I am not aware of. I noticed now that both IE > and Mozilla interperet this as valid url: > > file:/D:/Music/bob/Catch%20A Fire Well, those browsers accept a lot of things that aren't necessarily valid. I think that is the intent here as well... when you have something that can safely be converted to a URI the XML Schema rec allows for it. In terms of the multiple spaces being normalized, you could always create a derived type that constrained the whiteSpace facet to preserve. From the XML Schema view, if your application is consuming the PSVI it would only see the corrected URI anyway. > Generally, the whitespace normalized >> value is not what you >> deal with in an editor... you deal with the lexical >> value. >> >>> Just to be clear: this should be a valid xs:anyURI >>> isn't it ? http://www.example.org/c a/c%20b >>> and when I 'map' it to an URI becomes >>> >>> http://www.example.org/c%20a/c%20b >>> >>> Right ? >> If by "map" you mean apply the algorithm from XLink >> section 5.4, yes. >> Note that this kind of "mapping" is not done to >> namespace URIs in 1.0 or >> 1.1, so in theory you would never have a (legal) >> namespace that >> contained space characters. > > Legal for what ? Sorry, by legal I meant valid according to the URI rfc. Cheers, Jeff Rafter 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
