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

RE: Special ordering for BIDI URLs

From: Jonathan Rosenne <rosennej@qsm.co.il>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 14:36:41 +0300
To: "'\"Martin J. D?rst\"'" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "'Mark Davis ?'" <mark@macchiato.com>
Cc: <public-iri@w3.org>, <bidi@unicode.org>, "'Shawn Steele'" <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>, "'Murray Sargent'" <murrays@exchange.microsoft.com>, <aharon@google.com>, "'John C Klensin'" <klensin@jck.com>
Message-ID: <006001cafbfe$8e722270$ab566750$@co.il>
My idea was that the user agent would convert the local language scheme identifiers back and forth to the standard ones, so this is only a matter for the local user agent. The network will not see the local versions.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-iri-request@w3.org [mailto:public-iri-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of "Martin J. D?rst"
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: Mark Davis ?
> Cc: public-iri@w3.org; bidi@unicode.org; Shawn Steele; Murray Sargent;
> aharon@google.com; John C Klensin
> Subject: Re: Special ordering for BIDI URLs
> On 2010/05/25 9:10, Mark Davis ? wrote:
> > [The one real remaining piece is the scheme; the IRI is still
> understandable
> > (though ugly) if it has to be ASCII, but it would be somewhat better
> if it
> > could have a RTL alias.  (Pure digit fields like IP addresses are a
> bit
> > ugly, but seldom used.)]
> [I'm not sure what the IP address has to do in a discussion on schemes,
> I'll comment on the scheme only here.]
> In a short hallway discussion at the Hiroshima IETF, John Klensin and
> me
> discussed the possibility of allowing non-ASCII scheme names, but
> strictly limiting these to RTL scripts in practical use. If such a
> limitation were politically acceptable, it would provide a means to
> make
> RTL IRIs more consistent while avoiding an explosion of scheme
> identifiers.
> However, we were both skeptical about the political feasibility; once
> there are Arabic and Hebrew (and Syriac and Thaana and Dhivehi)
> identifiers, it's easy to imagine that others will want Greek and
> Cyrillic and Chinese and Korean and so on and so on and cry foul if
> they
> don't get it. That would explode the space of scheme identifiers.
> It should be clear that allowing scheme identifiers per language would
> be going totally over board. It would be one transcription for Arabic
> (script), not one for Arabic (language), one for Urdu, one for Persian,
> and so on. This is how it has worked with Latin schemes up to now, http
> works for English, French, Spanish, German, Italian,... and many more
> languages.
> Regards,   Martin.
> --
> #-# Martin J. D?rst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
> #-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp   mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
Received on Tuesday, 25 May 2010 11:37:10 UTC

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