[Simple] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5261 (3478)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 07 February 2013 15:40 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 325FD21F8782 for <simple@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 07:40:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.373
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.373 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.227, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QX6VU6D5uAJK for <simple@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 07:40:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 819A121F871D for <simple@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 07:40:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 41DEAB1E002; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 07:40:41 -0800 (PST)
To: jari.urpalainen@nokia.com, gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com, rjsparks@nostrum.com, hisham.khartabil@gmail.com, ben@nostrum.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20130207154041.41DEAB1E002@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 07:40:41 -0800
Cc: dret@berkeley.edu, simple@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [Simple] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5261 (3478)
X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions <simple.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/simple>, <mailto:simple-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/simple>
List-Post: <mailto:simple@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:simple-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple>, <mailto:simple-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 15:40:45 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5261, "An Extensible Markup Language (XML) Patch Operations Framework Utilizing XML Path Language (XPath) Selectors". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5261&eid=3478 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu> Section: 4.4.3 Original Text ------------- 4.4.3. Replacing a Namespace Declaration URI An example for a replacement of a namespace URI: <replace sel="doc/namespace::pref">urn:new:xxx</replace> This will replace the URI value of 'pref' prefixed namespace node with "urn:new:xxx". The parent node of the namespace declaration MUST be the <doc> element, otherwise an error occurs. Corrected Text -------------- 4.4.3. Replacing a Namespace URI An example for a replacement of a namespace URI: <replace sel="doc/namespace::pref">urn:new:xxx</replace> This will replace the URI of the namespace associated with the 'pref' prefix with "urn:new:xxx". The parent node of the namespace declaration MUST be the <doc> element, otherwise an error occurs. Replacing the namespace at the element where it is declared MUST also change all namespace nodes derived from this declaration in descendant elements. Notes ----- The spec uses the terms "namespace declaration" and "namespace" almost interchangeably, which is incorrect. It is impossible to select (and thus patch) *namespace declarations* using XPath. When selecting and replacing a *namespace*, then it should be taken into account that the *namespace declaration* very likely has resulted in numerous namespace nodes, attached to child elements of the element where the namespace was declared. It is likely that the spec intended to specify a "recursive replace" of the resulting namespace nodes of a namespace declaration, and this is what the corrected text suggests. The original text is mixing terminology, hard to read, and ambiguous in its meaning. If the spec text instead tried to specify that really only this one namespace node should be changed, then this can lead to rather strange effects in the resulting document, since the XPath tree now has "orphan" namespace nodes, which then need to be serialized and namespace declarations in locations where previously no namespace declarations occurred. One way or the other, this ambiguity needs to be clarified to make the spec easier to read and implement. Instructions: ------------- This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC5261 (draft-ietf-simple-xml-patch-ops-04) -------------------------------------- Title : An Extensible Markup Language (XML) Patch Operations Framework Utilizing XML Path Language (XPath) Selectors Publication Date : September 2008 Author(s) : J. Urpalainen Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [Simple] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5261 (347… RFC Errata System