W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2008

Re: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 08:47:42 +0100
To: "Martin Duerst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Brian Smith" <brian@briansmith.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.t75g9sq864w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:22:37 +0100, Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>  
wrote:
> At 13:36 08/03/17, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> What would it prove if we found no-one? That they aren't useful
>> encodings, or that there aren't use cases for non-ASCII characters in
>> headers?
>
> Good question. Maybe that the use cases for non-ASCII characters
> aren't strong enough to justify the uglyness of the encoding?

For style sheets attached through HTTP you'd want non-ASCII characters. So  
you can make meaningfull titles for content that can't be expressed with  
just ASCII characters:

   Link <test>;rel=stylesheet;title="foo"
   Link <alternate>;rel=stylesheet;title="bar"

(imagine foo and bar are not ASCII or latin-1 compatible)


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 17 March 2008 07:47:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:37 GMT