W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > June 2010

Re: ACTION-574: proposal on prefix rewriting

From: Peter Saint-Andre <Peter.SaintAndre@webex.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:49:33 -0600
To: Pratik Datta <pratik.datta@oracle.com>, Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>, XMLSec WG Public List <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C84661DD.9BCB%Peter.SaintAndre@webex.com>
Correct.


On 6/22/10 12:45 PM, "Pratik Datta" <pratik.datta@oracle.com> wrote:

> Do you think we should to UTF-8 encoding instead?
> 
> I tried reading the IRI spec and from what I understand it says that all non
> ascii characters should be converted to ascii using the %dd notation.  In that
> case US-ASCII should be fine, shouldn't it ?
> 
> Pratik
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Cantor [mailto:cantor.2@osu.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 10:20 AM
> To: Pratik Datta; XMLSec WG Public List
> Subject: RE: ACTION-574: proposal on prefix rewriting
> 
>> I realized that a URI is a sequence of characters, it can't be digested
>> unless it is converted to bytes. For this I am proposing that we use US-
>> ASCII encoding, because URI are limited to US-ASCII characters aren't they
> ?
> 
> No, they're not, although it tends to be good practice in namespace URIs to
> avoid pushing it and using IRIs or appending crazy path info. Your proposal
> seems to be to force them to be normalized into US-ASCII by URL encoding any
> character points that aren't. We should check on that to make sure that's
> sufficiently well-defined, but it sounds reasonable.
> 
> -- Scott
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 22 June 2010 18:50:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 June 2010 18:50:26 GMT