[oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview label

[Ian Green1]

Hi Steve
My assumption was that XHTML in a RDF XMLLiteral would not be 
html-encoded, but rather would be XML.  That's why XMLLiteral is in RDF - 
to deal with the common case of XML literals.  DOORS9, for example, does 
not escape xhtml in such literals.  So you will find "The rocket 
<s>MUST</s> launch" in a DOORS9 UI preview document.  RRC does not have 
markup in a title.

I don't know how all OSLC RM consumers deal with the XMLLiteral.    Adding 
clarification to the spec (that XHTML markup SHOULD NOT be escaped) seems 
appropriate and does not require the spec. to be changed.  Am I missing 
something?

best wishes,
    -ian

ian.green at uk.ibm.com (Ian Green1/UK/IBM at IBMGB)
Chief Software Architect, Requirements Definition and Management
IBM Rational

oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net wrote on 29/06/2012 15:19:40:

> From: Steve K Speicher <sspeiche at us.ibm.com>
> To: oslc-core at open-services.net, 
> Date: 29/06/2012 15:33
> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview 
label
> Sent by: oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> 
> Ian Green1 <ian.green at uk.ibm.com> wrote on 06/29/2012 10:11:46 AM:
> 
> > From: Ian Green1 <ian.green at uk.ibm.com>
> > To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS, 
> > Cc: oslc-core at open-services.net, oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> > Date: 06/29/2012 10:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview 

> label
> > 
> > Sorry, I've not been tracking this; apologies for late comments. 
> > 
> > I understand that the proposal is to reword the current specification? 
 
> If
> > so, should there not be some provision for backwards compatibility for 

> > current implementations? 
> > 
> It turns out that what was in the spec wasn't clear or very compatible, 
so 
> we aligned with what implementations reported they were doing late last 
> year as the recommendation forward.
> 
> > The DOORS implementation includes XHTML markup in the title of the 
> > oslc:Compact XML element.  If the spec. were to be changed as is 
> currently 
> > being proposed, the DOORS implementation would not be compliant. 
> > 
> You can still include XHTML markup in the title, that has not changed. 
> What is changed is how it is represented, instead of XMLLiteral we are 
> saying HTML-escaped content.  How does DOORS encode/escape the XHTML 
> elements?  Does DOORS Compact titles render properly in other tools that 

> consume it if they are doing it differently? 
> 
> > It seems to me to be a bad idea.  Could this issue be deferred to v3, 
or 
> can
> > a different approach be taken which ensures compatibility? 
> > 
> It was decided last year in the WG that things were unclear (and a bit 
> broken) so we came up the resolution then (which followed what most 
> implementations are doing, including RRC).  I know Devang was going to 
> investigate more and report back.
> 
> Let me know how DOORS handles, perhaps we need to have a meeting to 
review 
> and talk through the options.
> 
> Thanks,
> Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Oslc-Core mailing list
> Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
> 

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-core_open-services.net/attachments/20120704/38c45d79/attachment-0003.html>