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>
Shawn:

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.

Larry
--
http://larry.masinter.net


-----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
a
> 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
desirable.

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.

-Shawn
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