W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-iri@w3.org > November 2009

RE: Using Punicode for host names in IRI -> URI translation

From: Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:02:09 +0000
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
CC: "PUBLIC-IRI@W3.ORG" <PUBLIC-IRI@w3.org>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E14011F8737B524BB564B05FF748464A04454A3F@TK5EX14MBXC139.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
I'm still not sure that requiring punicode for URIs is helpful.

Say I have an existing app without this behavior.  In order to update the URI behavior, I have to service the application.  In fact punycode isn't even trivial since it might ripple throught the app to impact display and other forms where my % encoded stuff automagically is presented in Unicode right now.

Now if I'm going to spend a bit of dev & test time to get punycode for URIs right, I may as well use that time to build IRI support instead.  If I do that, then I don't need URI support, in which case I'll never get around to fixing the bug.

So saying "you MUST" do .... when converting an IRI to a URI doesn't seem very helpful to me.  If IDN use doesn't currently do that already I don't think people are going to change the system, risking instability, to fix (or maybe break) a downgrade scenario for compatibility in older software.

I don't know how a product manager would "sell" the need to make this change compared to other work (say moving to full IRI support).

-Shawn
Received on Saturday, 21 November 2009 19:02:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 April 2012 19:51:55 GMT