W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > February 2010

Re: Percent encoding

From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 22:52:06 +0100
Cc: "Silvia Pfeiffer" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, "Media Fragment" <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Message-Id: <4106E421-1567-4186-854B-5631F4417A34@cwi.nl>
To: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
I think we need to prioritize our needs, and then based on that prioritization decide whether to include quotes for id/track, when to do percent decoding, etc.

Here's a list of issues that I can come up with (unprioritized):

a. The MF syntax for queries and fragments should be identical
b. The MF syntax should be unambiguous
c.  The MF syntax should allow any UTF-8 character in track or id names
d. The MF syntax should adhere to applicable formal standards
e. The MF syntax should adhere to de-facto usage of queries and fragments
f. The MF syntax should be as concise as possible, with no unneeded grammatical fluff

Are there any issues I miss?

I think my current prioritizing would have b/c/d highest priority, then a, then e, then f.

But: this still leaves the question "what is de-facto usage". I typed in the youtube URL on a whim last week, but tonight I've tried a couple of other sites, and so far it seems that YouTube is the only major site I have come across that seems to do percent-decoding very early in the process. And even here it is very weird: using %26 as the argument separator *only* works if you also specify %3f as the query separator. If you use '?' then the %26 becomes an ampersand inside the search string.
Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack
If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman
Received on Saturday, 27 February 2010 21:53:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:44 UTC