Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 16:53:06 +0100 (MET) From: "Martin J. Duerst" <email@example.com> To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU> Cc: URI List <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: I18N Concensus - Generic Syntax Document In-Reply-To: <email@example.com> Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.95q.970307164951.245J-100000@enoshima> On Fri, 7 Mar 1997, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > >> >+ It is recommended that UTF-8 [RFC 2044] be used to represent characters > >> >+ with octets in URLs, wherever possible. > >> > > >> >+ For schemes where no single character->octet encoding is specified, > >> >+ a gradual transition to UTF-8 can be made by servers make resources > >> >+ available with UTF-8 names on their own, on a per-server or a > >> >+ per-resource basis. Schemes and mechanisms that use a well- > >> >+ defined character->octet encoding which is however not UTF-8 should > >> >+ define the mapping between this encoding and UTF-8, because generic > >> >+ URL software is unlikely to be aware of and to be able to handle > >> >+ such specific conventions. > >> I have no desire to add a UTF-8 character > >> mapping table to our server. > > > >There is no need to do so. The above is only a *recommendation*. > > Sorry, I misread the paragraph. It would be clearer to say > > URL creation mechanisms that generate the URL from a source which > is not restricted to a single character->octet encoding are > encouraged, but not required, to transition resource names toward > using UTF-8 exclusively. > > URL creation mechanisms that generate the URL from a source which > is restricted to a single character->octet encoding should use UTF-8 > exclusively. If the source encoding is not UTF-8, then a mapping > between the source encoding and UTF-8 should be used. This is excellent! Let's go with it! Regards, Martin.