We will have to wait to move XML Base and XLink 1.1 forward
until the revised IRI RFC is referenceable, but at this time
I'd like to ask you if our plan will address your concerns.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grosso, Paul
> Sent: Thursday, 2007 October 25 10:52
> To: [hidden email]; 'Michael Kay'
> Subject: Re: XML Base and "valid XML Resource Identifiers"
> At  you commented on the XML Base PER  saying that
> the term XML Resource Identifier was not well defined
> (e.g., soggy, built on sand).
> This started quite a process (several, in fact, some of
> which turned out to be dead ends). At the present time,
> our plan is to:
> 1. Change terminology to talk of "legacy extended IRIs"
> or LEIRI's.
> 2. Have LEIRI's defined by a revision of the IRI RFC.
> 3. Change XML Base (and XLink 1.1  and probably other
> XML-related specs) to reference the definition of LEIRI's
> in the IRI RFC.
> We will have to wait to move XML Base and XLink 1.1 forward
> until the revised IRI RFC is referenceable, but at this time
> I'd like to ask you to see the definition of LEIRI in the
> latest IRI draft at  to see if this will address your
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2 > 007JanMar/0001
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/PER-xmlbase-20061220/ >  http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-xlink11-20060328/ >  http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-iri-bis-01.txt > see section 7.