[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: models-10 comments
At 02:19 PM 3/14/2004, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>models-10 says:
>
>> 1.4. Common ABNF Productions
>> ; Any UTF-8 [UTF-8] encoded UCS [ISO10646] character
Are you sure you are looking at -10?
>There is no [ISO10646] in the References section. Perhaps this should
>be [Unicode], according to Kurt's suggestion in message 'ISO 10646 v
>Unicode' of 07 Jan 2004.
My copy says Unicode here.
>OTOH, UTF-8 is defined in terms of Iso10646, not Unicode, so [Unicode]
>does seem strange here.
[ISO10646] vs [UNICODE] issues are discussed in [RFC3629].
>[UTF-8] should be [RFC3639].
revision -10 does reference [RFC3629].
>BTW, There are 10646's in [Filters] and [Protocol] too.
>
>> 2.5.1. Attribute Types
>
>> - a subtype's syntax must be the same, or a refine of, its
>> supertype's syntax, and
>
>What is a refine of a syntax?
s/refine/refinement/ here.
(I don't think we necessarily need to detail precisely what a
"refinement" of a syntax is.)
>> 4.1. Schema Definitions
>
>> xstring = "X" HYPHEN 1*( UALPHA / HYPHEN / USCORE )
>
>This is a strange change from Models-09, which said
>
> xstring = X HYPHEN 1*( ALPHA / HYPHEN / USCORE )
>
>The X was uppercase only, now it can be either case.
Yes, to be consistent with RFC 2252 (and our discussion regarding
case insensitive).
>The rest could be either case, now it is uppercase only.
>Why such a swap?
Now it can be either case, "X" is case insensitive.
>Editorial comments:
Thanks, Kurt