Are you sure it’s pure errata? I
realize it’s easy enough to figure out what was intended, but it looks
like a normative change to me.
Dave
From: Drummond Reed
[mailto:]
Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005
5:09 AM
To: 'Wachob, Gabe';
;
Subject: RE: [xri] Comments from
Jerome Jump
Speaking of erratta, in writing another
document that references the Syntax spec, I noticed that we forgot to roll one
of the final changes we made to the ABNF in the main doc into the collected
ABNF in Appendix A.
It's on line 852/3 it currently says:
xri-gen-delims
= ":" / "/" / "?" / "#" / "["
/ "]" / "("
/ ")" / "*" / gcs-char
It should match lines 223/4:
xri-gen-delims = ":" / "/" / "?" /
"#" / "[" / "]" / "(" / ")"
/ "*" / "!" / rgcs-char
This is pure erratta, but we need to roll
it in too.
=Drummond
From: Wachob, Gabe
[mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:47 PM
To: ;
Subject: [xri] Comments from
Jerome Jump
These don't sound like changes requiring a
new draft, but if we do have a new draft, they should get integrated.
-Gabe
From: Jerome
Jump [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 11:51 AM
To: Wachob, Gabe
Cc: Chetan
Sabnis; Dave McAlpin
Subject: XRI Resolution V2.0
Gabe,
In reviewing Committee Draft 01, 14
March 2005 of the Extensible Resource Identifier (XRI) Resolution V2.0, I came
across the following:
1) On line
864: I believe the constructed XRI should be
“xri://@example2…” instead of
“xri://=example2…”. This is because the external
synonym (line 859) contains an “@”, not an “=”.
Or, change line 859 so that it says “xri://=example2”.
In any case, the two should be consistent.
2) A lot of the
XML, while correct, should be reformatted for easier reading by a human.
Other than that, the specs look
pretty good.
-Jerome M. Jump
Epok, Inc
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 4/1/2005
