W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-iri@w3.org > June 2010

RE: [bidi] Re: Special ordering for BIDI URLs

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 15:53:00 -0700
To: "'Jonathan Rosenne'" <rosennej@qsm.co.il>, "'Mohamed Mohie'" <MOHIEM@eg.ibm.com>, "'Adil Allawi'" <adil@diwan.com>
Cc: <aharon@google.com>, <bidi@unicode.org>, <bidi-bounce@unicode.org>, "'Mark Davis ?'" <mark@macchiato.com>, "'Matitiahu Allouche'" <matial@il.ibm.com>, "'Murray Sargent'" <murrays@exchange.microsoft.com>, "'Nasser Kettani'" <Nasser.Kettani@microsoft.com>, <public-iri@w3.org>, "'Shawn Steele'" <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <002701cb0501$da158260$8e408720$@org>
I'm having trouble fitting some of the suggestions for processing,
use of special characters and so forth against the various kinds of
processing agents used in dealing with IRIs (sequences of unicode
code points) and their visual presentation.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-iri/2010May/0058.html


a) Agents that take an IRI and produce a visual representation
b) Agents that allow a user to 'copy' an IRI and later 'paste'
  it into another (running text) environment, or otherwise
   inject IRIs into running text.
c) Agents that allow a user to input via some entry method
   some characters and transform these into IRIs.
d) Agents that scan a (running text) context and detect
   IRIs along with their boundaries
e) Agents that attempt to decide whether two IRIs would
   connect with the same resource when resolved.

Some amount of difference between the result of (a) vs. the
result of (b) followed by a display of the running text might
be allowed, e.g., IRIs might be visually presented  (a)
with spaces which, in (b) are turned into %20.

I *think* the discussion about 'special ordering' might apply to (a).


If you think about these things independently, for example:


> a) Pure RTL URLs are not practical currently, because of the scheme
> (http etc...) and the extension (html, asp, php etc...).

Perhaps (a) IRI -> Visual display, and (c) User Input of IRIs
might have some alternative  methods, e.g., to display "http:" and
".html" as special icons.

The IRI might not _be_ pure RTL, but it would _look_ like it
was pure RTL.

The problem space is highly constrained. Adding new directional
marker characters to the IRIs themselves may be much less feasible.

Larry
Received on Saturday, 5 June 2010 22:53:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:39:41 UTC