Re: [apps-discuss] Scope of RFC3986 and successor - what is a URI?

Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org> Mon, 19 January 2015 14:16 UTC

Return-Path: <gk@ninebynine.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC2A21AD2A9 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 06:16:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JirtcSvrRzc5 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 06:16:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay11.mail.ox.ac.uk (relay11.mail.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.162]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 389741B2A8D for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 06:16:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp4.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.207]) by relay11.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <gk@ninebynine.org>) id 1YDD8F-0005aH-bi; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:16:43 +0000
Received: from gklyne.plus.com ([80.229.154.156] helo=cheery.atuin.ninebynine.org) by smtp4.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <gk@ninebynine.org>) id 1YDD8F-00022G-ES; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:16:43 +0000
Message-ID: <54BD11CC.7030708@ninebynine.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:16:44 +0000
From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
References: <20140926010029.26660.82167.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <54B7BD4A.1090803@intertwingly.net> <f5ba91kjdt0.fsf@troutbeck.inf.ed.ac.uk> <54B7D851.7060201@intertwingly.net> <CAL0qLwbx3gSr1fJ1iw5QMk3dj2Dm4JMQzsUV_fnr9ef+M2T19g@mail.gmail.com> <54B7E32A.9090800@intertwingly.net> <CAL0qLwbJrcpKhsCAsD_CLAqQQ9rR8GhtpG2xeGO4mGQLriAcYQ@mail.gmail.com> <54B82FD7.9060208@intertwingly.net> <DM2PR0201MB0960CBA360C126703D002895C34E0@DM2PR0201MB0960.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <54B86E01.5000607@intertwingly.net> <DM2PR0201MB096068FC251451B76FBA859CC34C0@DM2PR0201MB0960.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <54B9B78F.3060000@intertwingly.net> <DM2PR0201MB0960802D3C63137E802FEEFFC34D0@DM2PR0201MB0960.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <54BB2AB3.5090805@intertwingly.net> <DM2PR0201MB096099AB8117CDB65A29FA51C34D0@DM2PR0201MB0960.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <54BBC640.5000607@intertwingly.net> <DM2PR0201MB09600E751795BF09A6237674C34D0@DM2PR0201MB0960.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM2PR0201MB09600E751795BF09A6237674C34D0@DM2PR0201MB0960.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Oxford-Username: zool0635
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/WWar-8eBjSh9naQUXejvi5YYnkA>
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Scope of RFC3986 and successor - what is a URI?
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:16:59 -0000

On 18/01/2015 21:09, Larry Masinter wrote:
>>          The primary role of a URI parser is to simply decide if a given
>>          string is or is not a valid URI.  A parser can only be
>>          RFC3986-compliant in the extent to which it correctly makes
>>          this determination in accordance with RFC3986.
>
> I disagree with both these sentences, at least as I understand the
> terms "primary role", "parser", "valid", "compliant".
>
> The primary role of a parser http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsing#Parser
> is to take input data and give a structural representation of the input,
> while checking for correct syntax in the process.

At risk or going down an unhelpful rathole...

A key phrase in your quote is "while checking for correct syntax".

In the absence of a definition of a "structural representation" in RFC3986, I 
don't see how RFC3986 compliance can extend beyond the determination of correct 
syntax, which is what I meant by "valid".

>
> Deciding validity is the role of a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validator.

Per that definition, I would say a parser is (or incorporates) a particular kind 
of validator.

#g
--