Hi Frank,
Thanks for the feedback. Responses below.
On 29/11/2011, at 8:23 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Hi, that's an important and good draft. Some editorial nits:
In section 2.1 you use CTL, DQUOTE, and SP in a comment.
Please add these terms to the ABNF imports in section 1.5.
I'm -0 on this, as they're informative, whereas 1.5 is normative.
In section 1.3 you mention WSDL, WADL and OpenSearch.
Please add informative references and expand the acronyms.
In SVN.
Please update the TUS reference to 6.x. There are no
changes wrt the concepts used in this draft (stability of
non-characters, etc.), but I think UTR #15 is an integral
part of TUS since 5.0 (?)
In SVN.
In section 3.1 you write:
| If the literal character is allowed anywhere in the URI
| syntax (unreserved / reserved / pct-encoded ), then it is
| copied directly
Do you mean "is allowed in the given part of the URI" here?
What I have in mind are, e.g., %x5B and %x5D in a query or
fragment. By definition in 2.1 these are "literals", but
have to be percent-encoded n STD 66 queries or fragments.
Not sure what you're saying here; the URI escape syntax is % HEXDIG HEXDIG. If
the literal string "%x5B" occurs in a template, it'll be copied into the
result, since it looks like a percent-encoded ("%x5") followed by a "B". If the
literal character "[" occurs in a template, it'll also be copied into the
result, since that's part of reserved (thanks to gen-delims).
The intent here is definitely for a processor NOT to need to know what part of
the URI it's in, since templates can make this ambiguous.
--
Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf