28272 2015-03-22 15:59:17 +0000 [QT3TS] fn-resolve-uri-28, non-hierarchical uris, test should not raise FORG0002 2015-04-01 23:06:28 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT XQuery 3 & XPath 3 Test Suite Recommendation PC Windows NT RESOLVED WONTFIX P2 normal --- 1 abel.braaksma oneil mike public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 118788 0 abel.braaksma 2015-03-22 15:59:17 +0000 Test fn-resolve-uri-28 expects error FORG0002 on resolve-uri("b.html", "urn:isbn:01234567890X"), but I can't find anything in http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt that disallows that. The URN fits the production of an absolute URI with scheme "urn" and path "isbn:01234567890X". The algorithm in 5.2.2 skips to the merge(Base.path, R.path) line (non-empty R.path and not starting with "/"). The relevant part of the merge function (section 5.2.3) says: * return a string consisting of the reference's path component appended to all but the last segment of the base URI's path (i.e., excluding any characters after the right-most "/" in the base URI path, or excluding the entire base URI path if it does not contain any "/" characters). In other words, the path-part must be removed and the resulting URI will then be "urn:b.html". Uncommon, but not an illegal result. I doubt that this should raise FORG0002. 118790 1 mike 2015-03-22 19:37:40 +0000 The current wording of the spec was introduced in Erratum E1 to the 2007 edition of Functions and Operators, and the discussion is reported in bug #4373. I think that the test fairly reflects the decisions of the WG reported in that discussion. I agree that the term "non-hierarchic URI" is not very clearly defined (like many other aspects of URIs), but I think it means a URI in a scheme that uses a non-hierarchic path component, of which the "urn" scheme is the classic example. 119139 2 oneil 2015-03-31 14:23:44 +0000 I assume nothing should be done with this bug issue. Please reopen if you disagree 119186 3 abel.braaksma 2015-04-01 23:06:28 +0000 I think you are right. I mainly had a hard time finding out what a hierarchical URI is (in unambiguous terms), but after a couple of times rereading, I found this in the RFC: A path is always defined for a URI, though the defined path may be empty (zero length). Use of the slash character to indicate hierarchy is only required when a URI will be used as the context for relative references. Then I thought this still leaves schemes like palm:service/option1/option2 (apparently this really exists), which contain a slash and have a non-zero length path, but later I see: In addition, a URI reference (Section 4.1) may be a relative-path reference, in which case the first path segment cannot contain a colon (":") character. To conclude, it took me a while to grasp it, but it is all there, somewhere ;), and indeed, the test is good (and our results faulty). As an aside, it was Oracle who defined it much easier: A hierarchical URI is either an absolute URI whose scheme-specific part begins with a slash character, or a relative URI, that is, a URI that does not specify a scheme. -- from http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/net/URI.html