HTML CHANGE PROPOSAL; change definition of URL to normative reference to IRIBIS

[Larry Masinter-3]

I have updated the proposed draft charter for IRI work in IETF:

http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/DraftIriCharter

to explicitly calls for the resulting document as being
suitable as a normative reference from HTML, and points
to a draft of HTML Editor Requirements at the end of
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/IriWorkGoals.

Please review, accept, or update as necessary, the "HTML
Editor Requirements" prior to IETF chartering of the
working group next Tuesday Nov 10.  

Assuming the liaison and requirements are acceptable as
part of the IETF IRI working group charter and we find
sufficient volunteers for editing, reviewing nad chairing,

I offer a (vague, but I think workable)

CHANGE PROPOSAL FOR HTML:

Based on assuming
that those requirements are met: please replace the
definition of URL in the HTML5 specification and all
descriptions of URL processing in the HTML5 specification
with specific references to the [IRIBIS] document.


I think this includes sections such as

* Determine whether a string best matches Relative
  or Absolute, e.g., one might say:
  "Determine whether Absolute or Relative as per [IRIBIS]"

* Determine whether a string is or isn't valid an IRI
  "Determine whether valid as per [IRIBIS]"

* Offer heuristics for interpreting a user input
  or other unvalidated string as an IRI
  "User agents MAY interpret invalid strings as if
  they were valid in cases where the input is
  not otherwise validated, as per [IRIBIS]"

* Resolve a relative IRI against a base

As far as timing goes:

Whenever you have a normative specification to another
specification which is, itself, under development,
there is some coordination necessary, but this request
is based on the assumption that it isn't necessary
to wait for the IRIBIS process to complete in order
for HTML5 to go to last call prior to its publication
as Proposed Recommendation.

If there is not an IETF working group to update these
documents such that they are suitable for reference
by the HTML working group, then an appropriate change
proposal would be to put back in the HTML5-only
URL parsing algorithm that was there before the
[WEBADDRESS] specification was split out.

Larry
--
http://larry.masinter.net

[Maciej Stachowiak]

I'm assuming this is intended as a Change Proposal for ISSUE-56 urls-
webarch (mentioning that so the tracker finds it).

My understanding of this proposal is that you'd like the proposed  
changes to be made once the IRI Working Group forms and has a draft  
with all the necessary definitions. If that understanding is correct,  
then I think we should take up this proposal once those preconditions  
have been met. If I have misunderstood, then please clarify.

Speaking in a personal capacity, the draft charter looks good.

Regards,
Maciej

On Nov 5, 2009, at 12:20 PM, Larry Masinter wrote:

> I have updated the proposed draft charter for IRI work in IETF:
>
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/DraftIriCharter
>
> to explicitly calls for the resulting document as being
> suitable as a normative reference from HTML, and points
> to a draft of HTML Editor Requirements at the end of
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/IriWorkGoals.
>
> Please review, accept, or update as necessary, the "HTML
> Editor Requirements" prior to IETF chartering of the
> working group next Tuesday Nov 10.
>
> Assuming the liaison and requirements are acceptable as
> part of the IETF IRI working group charter and we find
> sufficient volunteers for editing, reviewing nad chairing,
>
> I offer a (vague, but I think workable)
>
> CHANGE PROPOSAL FOR HTML:
>
> Based on assuming
> that those requirements are met: please replace the
> definition of URL in the HTML5 specification and all
> descriptions of URL processing in the HTML5 specification
> with specific references to the [IRIBIS] document.
>
>
> I think this includes sections such as
>
> * Determine whether a string best matches Relative
>  or Absolute, e.g., one might say:
>  "Determine whether Absolute or Relative as per [IRIBIS]"
>
> * Determine whether a string is or isn't valid an IRI
>  "Determine whether valid as per [IRIBIS]"
>
> * Offer heuristics for interpreting a user input
>  or other unvalidated string as an IRI
>  "User agents MAY interpret invalid strings as if
>  they were valid in cases where the input is
>  not otherwise validated, as per [IRIBIS]"
>
> * Resolve a relative IRI against a base
>
> As far as timing goes:
>
> Whenever you have a normative specification to another
> specification which is, itself, under development,
> there is some coordination necessary, but this request
> is based on the assumption that it isn't necessary
> to wait for the IRIBIS process to complete in order
> for HTML5 to go to last call prior to its publication
> as Proposed Recommendation.
>
> If there is not an IETF working group to update these
> documents such that they are suitable for reference
> by the HTML working group, then an appropriate change
> proposal would be to put back in the HTML5-only
> URL parsing algorithm that was there before the
> [WEBADDRESS] specification was split out.
>
> Larry
> --
> http://larry.masinter.net
>
>

[Larry Masinter-3]

> I'm assuming this is intended as a Change Proposal for ISSUE-56 urls-
> webarch (mentioning that so the tracker finds it).

Yes, the "HTML CHANGE PROPOSAL" was addressed to
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/56


> My understanding of this proposal is that you'd like the proposed  
> changes to be made once the IRI Working Group forms and has a draft  
> with all the necessary definitions. If that understanding is correct,  
> then I think we should take up this proposal once those preconditions  
> have been met. If I have misunderstood, then please clarify.

No. Waiting for preconditions would create an unfortunate and
unnecessary deadlock. The current internet draft
   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-duerst-iri-bis-07

is sufficient to consider the HTML WG proposal now. Any definition
thought "necessary" and not contained in -07 should be treated
as an issue/change proposal to it.

draft-duerst-iri-bis-07 is the proposed starting point of the IRI
working group, and changes or additions should be made as the
result of participation, discussion and consensus on the
public-iri@... mailing list, including the participation
of members of the browser vendor and broader HTML community.

Larry
--
http://larry.masinter.net

[Maciej Stachowiak]

On Nov 25, 2009, at 6:42 AM, Larry Masinter wrote:

>> I'm assuming this is intended as a Change Proposal for ISSUE-56 urls-
>> webarch (mentioning that so the tracker finds it).
>
> Yes, the "HTML CHANGE PROPOSAL" was addressed to
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/56
>
>
>> My understanding of this proposal is that you'd like the proposed
>> changes to be made once the IRI Working Group forms and has a draft
>> with all the necessary definitions. If that understanding is correct,
>> then I think we should take up this proposal once those preconditions
>> have been met. If I have misunderstood, then please clarify.
>
> No. Waiting for preconditions would create an unfortunate and
> unnecessary deadlock.

When you say "deadlock", do you mean the formation of the IRI WG or  
the drafting of the IRI spec are somehow blocked on changes to HTML5?

> The current internet draft
>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-duerst-iri-bis-07
>
> is sufficient to consider the HTML WG proposal now. Any definition
> thought "necessary" and not contained in -07 should be treated
> as an issue/change proposal to it.

I'm glad to hear the IRIbis draft is ready to be referenced. I'll put  
your Change Proposal on the tracking list. However, I think that to  
fully meet the requirements for a Change Proposal it may require a  
little bit more detail.

HTML5 has, as far as I can tell, exactly 4 references to  
[WEADDRESSES], all in this section: <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#terminology-0 
 >. All URL processing is based on those 4 references. It should be  
simple to state what specifically should replace them. Specifically,  
the HTML5 draft references the definition for a "valid Web Address",  
the definition for an "absolute Web Address", the algorithm to "parse  
a Web Address" into components, and the algorithm to "resolve a Web  
Address" relative to a base. Can you please update the Change Proposal  
to mention the specific references to draft-duerst-iri-bis-07 that  
should replace these references? Ideally these would refer to specific  
defined terms, algorithms or grammar productions in the IRIbis draft.

Providing specific details for the requested change is a required part  
of a Change Proposal, as stated here: <http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html#change-proposal 
 >.

> draft-duerst-iri-bis-07 is the proposed starting point of the IRI
> working group, and changes or additions should be made as the
> result of participation, discussion and consensus on the
> public-iri@... mailing list, including the participation
> of members of the browser vendor and broader HTML community.

Sounds good.

Thanks,
Maciej

[Maciej Stachowiak]

Thanks for providing a Change Proposal for this issue! The chairs are  
reviewing Change Proposals to ensure that they meet the required  
structure. Here is our feedback on this Change Proposal:

1) Including the subsequently sent draft text, it seems to include  
sufficient summary, details and impact. The subject line seems like a  
fine one-sentence summary in fact.

2) There does not appear to be a rationale. Please provide a Rationale  
section.

We suggest updating the Change Proposal to reflect the feedback in  
point (2).

Regards,
Maciej


On Nov 5, 2009, at 12:20 PM, Larry Masinter wrote:

> I have updated the proposed draft charter for IRI work in IETF:
>
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/DraftIriCharter
>
> to explicitly calls for the resulting document as being
> suitable as a normative reference from HTML, and points
> to a draft of HTML Editor Requirements at the end of
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/IriWorkGoals.
>
> Please review, accept, or update as necessary, the "HTML
> Editor Requirements" prior to IETF chartering of the
> working group next Tuesday Nov 10.
>
> Assuming the liaison and requirements are acceptable as
> part of the IETF IRI working group charter and we find
> sufficient volunteers for editing, reviewing nad chairing,
>
> I offer a (vague, but I think workable)
>
> CHANGE PROPOSAL FOR HTML:
>
> Based on assuming
> that those requirements are met: please replace the
> definition of URL in the HTML5 specification and all
> descriptions of URL processing in the HTML5 specification
> with specific references to the [IRIBIS] document.
>
>
> I think this includes sections such as
>
> * Determine whether a string best matches Relative
>  or Absolute, e.g., one might say:
>  "Determine whether Absolute or Relative as per [IRIBIS]"
>
> * Determine whether a string is or isn't valid an IRI
>  "Determine whether valid as per [IRIBIS]"
>
> * Offer heuristics for interpreting a user input
>  or other unvalidated string as an IRI
>  "User agents MAY interpret invalid strings as if
>  they were valid in cases where the input is
>  not otherwise validated, as per [IRIBIS]"
>
> * Resolve a relative IRI against a base
>
> As far as timing goes:
>
> Whenever you have a normative specification to another
> specification which is, itself, under development,
> there is some coordination necessary, but this request
> is based on the assumption that it isn't necessary
> to wait for the IRIBIS process to complete in order
> for HTML5 to go to last call prior to its publication
> as Proposed Recommendation.
>
> If there is not an IETF working group to update these
> documents such that they are suitable for reference
> by the HTML working group, then an appropriate change
> proposal would be to put back in the HTML5-only
> URL parsing algorithm that was there before the
> [WEBADDRESS] specification was split out.
>
> Larry
> --
> http://larry.masinter.net
>
>