On 12/9/13 6:53 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 12:49 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx > <mailto:iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > > The IESG has received a request from the SIP-TO-XMPP WG (stox) to > consider the following document: > - 'Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the > Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Architecture, > Addresses, and Error Handling' > <draft-ietf-stox-core-07.txt> as Proposed Standard > > > A small nit - §5.5 contains: > > Several examples follow, illustrating steps 3, 5, and 8 described > above (the percent-encoded string "%C3%BC" and XML Notation string > "�FC;" both represent the Unicode character LATIN SMALL LETTER U > WITH DIAERESIS). > > I don't think this is quite true. The percent-encoded string is an > encoding of the codepoint U+FC as UTF-8, whereas the construct �FC; > is an XML notation for the character - which crucially is not part of > the address format, but simple how one could transmit the address over > XML (including XMPP). You sent a similar message to the STOX WG list about another I-D produced by that WG, but I didn't grok your point until just now. I think this text would be clearer: ### +----------------------------+--------------------------+ | SIP URI | XMPP Address | +----------------------------+--------------------------+ | sip:f%C3%BC@sip.example | fü@sip.example | | sip:o'malley@sip.example | o\27malley@sip.example | | sip:foo@sip.example;gr=bar | foo@sip.example/bar | +----------------------------+--------------------------+ In the first example, the string "%C3%BC" is a percent-encoded representation of the UTF-8-encoded Unicode character LATIN SMALL LETTER U WITH DIAERESIS (U+00FC), whereas the string "ü" is the same character shown for documentation purposes using the XML Notation defined in [RFC3987] (in XMPP it would be sent directly as a UTF-8-encoded Unicode character and not percent-encoded as in a SIP URI to comply with the URI syntax defined in [RFC3986]). ### > The example given is actually tsch�FCss@xmpp.example - due to there > being no terminating ";", I'd expect that to be taken literally by an > XML parser, and not be treated as tschüss@xmpp.example as I suspect is > desired. That's a typo - the ';' is missing (and in fact the "00" is not needed in accordance with the XML Notation from RFC 3987). Thus: OLD tsch�FCss@xmpp.example NEW tschüss@xmpp.example Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/