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

RE: BIDI IRI Display (was spoofing and IRIs)

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 09:13:37 -0800
To: "'Shawn Steele'" <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>, "'Slim Amamou'" <slim@alixsys.com>
Cc: <public-iri@w3.org>, "'Peter Constable'" <petercon@microsoft.com>, <unicode@unicode.org>
Message-ID: <002901cabbbe$0a9c5b80$1fd51280$@org>

People send URIs in email: http://larry.masinter.net.
Are you suggesting that IRIs should never appear in plain
text, or that no one should look at the source of
a text/html document and view the IRIs in it?

I would claim that if you could guarantee IRI-specific
visual display handling that was different from the
generic sequence-of-character visual display handling,
you wouldn't need IRIs at all. Only send around URIs,
and when presenting them to the user, convert to an
appropriate unicode display.


-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Steele [mailto:Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 8:39 AM
To: Larry Masinter; 'Slim Amamou'
Cc: public-iri@w3.org; Peter Constable; unicode@unicode.org
Subject: RE: BIDI IRI Display (was spoofing and IRIs)

> (1) transform IRI as sequence of unicode characters  to visual
> presentation

> (2) transform iRI as (sequence of unicode characters, interpreted as
> list) to visual presentation

> HOWEVER: I think it is more important that the results of
> (1) and (2) be the SAME than it is that (2) be optimum.

I don't think (1) is interesting or when it would be desirable.
Feedback from the Bidi community seems to be that it would never be

I'd be happy with this being in a different document.  TR#36 isn't the
right place, but I think display should be somewhere.

Received on Thursday, 4 March 2010 17:14:19 UTC

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