[Council] question about JEP-0029 (JIDs)

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Mon May 13 11:22:22 CDT 2002


I just chatted with Craig about this. Really I was just raising it as a
possible issue. I'd prefer to address any of these restrictions (esp. the
ASCII characters) as a revision to JEP-0029 or as a new JEP intended to
supersede JEP-0029.

So onward with the voting! :)

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation
http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.html

On Fri, 10 May 2002, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> I've been working the last few nights on a proposed specification for
> Jabber URIs (http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0032.html), and I see a
> potential conflict regarding allowable characters. Specifically, as far as
> I can see, the following characters currently allowed by JEP-0029 would be
> disallowed (at least in unescaped form) in a node identifier when included
> as part of a URI:
> 
> 1. Any Unicode character other than US-ASCII
> 2. #x23 (#)
> 3. #x24 ($)
> 4. #x25 (%)
> 5. #x2B (+)
> 6. #x2C (,)
> 7. #x3B (;)
> 8. #x3D (=)
> 9. #x3F (?)
> 
> I'm not saying we need to be slaves to the URI spec (RFC 2396), but I'm
> wondering if we have a good reason to include the ASCII characters
> referenced above in a node identifier, since disallowing these
> in node identifiers would save us from escaping them in Jabber URIs.
> Besides the following potential JIDs both seem almost equally odd:
> 
> blah"&'/:<>@blah at jabber.org (bad according to JEP-0029)
> blah$+,;=?#%blah at jabber.org (bad according to RFC 2396)
> 
> (The effective exclusion of non-ASCII characters is another story -- see
> JEP-0032 for a short explanation of this, or see RFC 2396.)
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Peter
> 
> --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> Jabber Software Foundation
> http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.html
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Council mailing list
> Council at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council
> 




More information about the Council mailing list