Re: [apps-discuss] presumption that RFC3986 is correct

[Sam Ruby <[e-mail]>]

On 01/03/2015 12:03 PM, Graham Klyne wrote:
> On 03/01/2015 13:09, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> On 01/03/2015 07:10 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:
>>>
>>> 3. Where there is divergence between implementations and RFC3986, these
>>> indeed should be considered on a case-by-case basis, but with (IMO) the
>>> presumption that RFC3986 is correct.  I.e. it is for those who think
>>> there is a problem with RFC3986 to make the case.
>>
>> You ask me to presume that RFC 3986 is correct.  That's a big ask.
>> Particularly
>> given that there is no clear path provided for updating RFC 3986.  For
>> context,
>> that's a decade old spec that I did not participate in the development
>> of, and I
>> have clear data that shows that popular parsing libraries -- client,
>> sever, and
>> everywhere in the middle -- don't implement.
>
> Presumption:  "An idea that is taken to be true on the basis of
> probability"
> -- http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/presumption
>
> (Note: not "assumption".  I mean like "presumption of innocence")

If you wish to give me a language lesson, the please permit me to do 
likewise.

Evidence: "the available body of facts or information indicating whether 
a belief or proposition is true or valid."

(Note: not "faith".  I mean like "scientific evidence")

> For precisely the reasons you state (i.e. it's been around and in use
> for a while, and it has been the primary reference source for
> implementers who care about standards) I don't think it's a big ask.
> But if you feel differently, then so be it.

It indeed has been around for a while.  As have a large number of 
implementations.  Many of which predate RFC 3986.

A large number of well-intentioned implementations do indeed give lip 
service to RFC 3986 compliance.  You may chose to accept those claims on 
face value.  As I have evidence to the contrary, sadly, I no longer do.

I intend to work with implementors, providing patches and/or new 
implementations along the way.  And I'll continue to document and 
publish findings.  One such place I have published such work is at the  W3C:

   http://www.w3.org/TR/url/

Meanwhile, I'm actively inquiring as to whether there are others who 
would be willing to help update RFC 3986 with me.  If that is not meant 
to be, so be it.

> #g
> --

- Sam Ruby