I'm not sure I understand the whitespace treatment.
One example has:
<url location="de" priority="1">
ftp://ftp.example.com/example.ext
</url>
...
"All leading and trailing whitespace is part of the element content,
and MUST be ignored. Consequently, it is disallowed for elements
where
the defined type does not allow whitespace, such as dates, integers,
or IRIs."
Um, that should be "MUST NOT be ignored", right?
Fixed.
Why is whitespace so important? The alternative to constraining use as you
have done, which requires that you also "fix" all the examples, is to use the
type that fits better with user expectations: token.
In the *value space* for the token type, the above example is simply
"ftp://ftp.example.com/example.ext";, with leading and trailing whitespace
stripped.
Then you can remove the following note:
Note that there MUST NOT be any white space in a Date construct or in
any IRI. Some XML-generating implementations erroneously insert
white space around values by default, and such implementations will
generate invalid Metalink Documents.
... and with it, avoid all the errors that inevitably occur when you make
whitespace significant. Unless you believe that Metalink documents will never
be authored by anything other than software.
In looking into this, I noted this:
# Unconstrained; it's not entirely clear how IRI fit into
# xsd:anyURI so let's not try to constrain it here
I wonder why you haven't taken the plunge on xsd:anyURI, even if xsd:anyURI has
dubious official status with regards to IRIs. In practice, IRIs are commonly
placed in xsd:anyURI. The lexical space accommodates them, no implementation
I'm aware of prevents use of IRIs.
--Martin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf