Issue 2660: Naming FTF: Stringified name ambiguity (naming_ftf) Source: (, ) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Summary: I think we all agree that the following stringified names are syntax errors: /ab a//b ab/ That is to ensure that there is only a single representation of empty id and kind fields. In other words, the above names are correctly expressed as: ./ab a/./b ab/. It occurred to me that we have a related problem with empty kind fields. For example, the following two strings appear to denote the same name component: ab. ab In other words, the spec isn"t clear whether the trailing dot is permitted. Resolution: Original submission intention is for a name to have a single valid stringified representation. Clar Revised Text: Changed second example in Section 4.5.1 (3.5.1) from "a.b/c.d" to "a.b/c.d/.". Added sentence after table describing that example: "The single '.' character is the only representation of a name component with empty id and kind fields." Actions taken: May 21, 1999: received issue May 4, 2000: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 13:09:16 +1000 (EST) From: Michi Henning To: issues@omg.org Subject: Naming FTF: Stringified name ambiguity Message-ID: Organization: Triodia Technologies MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-UIDL: 2b86ddf982bbf8c60d7a01a561987f1c [ Juergen, could you please start a new issue database for the naming FTF so we can track these things properly? Thanks -- Michi ] Hi, I think we all agree that the following stringified names are syntax errors: /ab a//b ab/ That is to ensure that there is only a single representation of empty id and kind fields. In other words, the above names are correctly expressed as: ./ab a/./b ab/. It occurred to me that we have a related problem with empty kind fields. For example, the following two strings appear to denote the same name component: ab. ab In other words, the spec isn't clear whether the trailing dot is permitted. I would suggest to require the trailing dot to be present only if the kind field is non-empty. For name components with an empty kind field, no trailing dot must be present. In summary, I think we need to add the following rules to the spec in order to preserve unique string representations for names: An empty name component (both id and kind field are empty strings) must be expressed as: . id = "", kind = "" A name component with a non-empty id field and an empty kind field must not have a trailing dot: ab id = "ab", kind = "" A name component with non-empty id and kind fields must have a dot as separator: ab.cd id = "ab", kind = "cd" A name component with an empty id field and a non-empty kind field must begin with a dot: .ab id = "", kind = "ab" Cheers, Michi. -- Michi Henning +61 7 3236 1633 Triodia Technologies +61 4 1118 2700 (mobile) PO Box 372 +61 7 3211 0047 (fax) Annerley 4103 michi@triodia.com AUSTRALIA http://www.triodia.com/staff/michi-henning.html From: Paul Kyzivat To: "'naming_ftf@omg.org'" Cc: "Juergen Boldt (E-mail)" Subject: Re: Issue 2660: Naming FTF: Stringified name ambiguity Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 15:29:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-UIDL: 67fd9SH?e9)Oid9B@%e9 I know I commented on this earlier, but my comments don't appear in the log. (Juergen, do you have any idea why that might be?) To summarize: I disagree violently with forcing a cannonical input form for names on users. Where clear and unambiguous alternative input forms make sense they should be permitted. If this passes I will happily risk the rath of the gods by being non-conformant in order to be more forgiving to users. In particular, in this case, I would happily accept all of the following as synonyms for ./ab: /ab /ab. ./ab. How many times have you heard some computer user complain: "if it knew what was wrong why didn't it just do the right thing?" ____________________ Paul Kyzivat Rogue Wave Software paulk@roguewave.com