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

RE: Scope question

From: Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com>
Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 13:45:10 -0400
To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>, "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C7A5719F1E562149BA9171F58BEE2CA4129DCF6E21@EX-IAD6-B.ant.amazon.com>
Hello Adam (and WG),

This is my first post after becoming, with Marc, the co-chair, so I welcome you all and hope that we can make rapid and useful progress together.

> Would a document describing these decisions be of interset to this
> working group?  If so, how would that document relate to RFC 3986
> and RFC 3987?  Would the working group be interested in such a document
> in an informative or a normative voice?

(as co-chair)

The charter of this group does indeed include creating a document or documents that describe IRI syntax, parsing and comparison (to supersede RFC 3987). One of the key things this WG will need to consider is a test suite to validate processing of IRIs as defined by our documents.

> In the course of this work, I'm going to have make some
> exciting decisions like whether the URL processing pipeline should
> covert schemes to lower case or whether the a # character in a
> fragment should be represented using the # character or using the
> characters %23.

If there are differences in the handling by various vendors, documenting them could be useful in deciding what normative behavior should be. Documenting processing behaviors is also useful, but in terms of what this WG formally produces, it probably needs to live within the bounds of what is (proposed to be) normative in IRIbis (e.g. RFC 3986 Section 3.1 already says how case should be handled in scheme; the implementation details for how that is achieved are not as important as the conformance test cases themselves). To be in scope to this WG's effort, I believe your document would need to focus on normative behaviors defined by our documents. Is this what you had in mind?

Regards,

Addison

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect (Lab126)
Chair (W3C I18N, IETF IRI WGs)

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-iri-request@w3.org [mailto:public-iri-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Adam Barth
> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 7:23 PM
> To: public-iri@w3.org
> Subject: Scope question
> 
> The charter for this group says that we're to produce a document
> that
> explains the syntax, parsing, comparison of IRIs.  It also says
> that
> the documents we produce should be suitable for normative reference
> with Web and XML standards from W3C specifications.
> 
> Currently I'm in the midst of comparing the URL processing behavior
> of
> Safari and Chrome and coming up with a common behavior for these
> two
> browsers.  In the course of this work, I'm going to have make some
> exciting decisions like whether the URL processing pipeline should
> covert schemes to lower case or whether the a # character in a
> fragment should be represented using the # character or using the
> characters %23.
> 
> Would a document describing these decisions be of interset to this
> working group?  If so, how would that document relate to RFC 3986
> and
> RFC 3987?  Would the working group be interested in such a document
> in
> an informative or a normative voice?
> 
> Kind regards,
> Adam
Received on Wednesday, 5 May 2010 17:45:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 April 2012 19:51:57 GMT