W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > March 2000

Re: IURI questions

From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 09:24:24 -0800
To: a.irvine@bfs.phone.com
Cc: Larry Masinter <LM@att.com>, Benedict Wee Tee Wei <benewee@ida.gov.sg>, "Rogers, Paul" <progers@vignette.com>, uri@w3.org, idn@ops.ietf.org, duerst@w3.org
Message-Id: <E12QZKq-000KlO-00@rip.psg.com>
only list subscribers may post to the list

randy

> Message-ID: <38BE79DC.84AE1247@corp.phone.com>
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
> X-Accept-Language: en-GB,fr,eo
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> References: <NDBBKEBDLFENBJCGFOIJMEICCEAA.LM@att.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 14:25:33 +0000
> From: Aaron Irvine <airvine@corp.phone.com>
> Reply-To: a.irvine@bfs.phone.com
> To: Larry Masinter <LM@att.com>
> CC: Benedict Wee Tee Wei <benewee@ida.gov.sg>,
>  	"Rogers, Paul" <progers@vignette.com>, uri@w3.org,
>  	idn@ops.ietf.org, duerst@w3.org
> Subject: Re: IURI questions
> 
> > > > * hex-encoded characters in URLs.  I just tried surfing to
> > > > www.%79%61%68%6f%6f.com, and on IE5, it takes me to www.yahoo.com, but
> > > > Netscape Navigator 4.6 can't find the server.
> >
> > It's interesting that it works! The question is whether it should.
> >
> > Larry
> > --
> > http://larry.masinter.net
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Yes I believe it should work.
> 
> I think:
> that human visible (typing into browsers, adverts on radio, etc.maybe in hrefs
> too) escaped Unicode should be consistent with URI path escaped Unicode (i.e.
> %hh escaped utf8),
> and that URI-authorities like www.%79%61%68%6f%6f.com [works in IE5] and
> schemes like k%C3%A1va [RFC2324] are IMHO the correct way to _present URI's_
> to end users
> however within the net we have to _encode URI's_:
> scheme        = alpha *( alpha | digit | "+" | "-" | "." ) ;[RFC 2396]
> domainlabel   = alphanum | alphanum *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum  ;[RFC 2396]
> labels 63 'septets' max each, dns 255 'septets' max,
> possibly a desire not to change (immediately) the dns infrastructure,
> and I also note:
> hyphen hyphen and hyphen hyphen hyphen are allowed but rarely (never?) used in
> practice, hence free for our use...
> 
> 
> 
> So at the very top of the stack, use %hh escaped UTF-8.  But deeper, utilise
> somehow the hyphen to encode characters above ASCII.  One possibility I here
> suggest could be:
> * triple-hyphened UTF-5 for when a scheme/username/domainlabel contains one or
> more characters above Latin extended B
> * double-hyphened UTF-8 otherwise
> where:
> * triple-hyphened UTF-5 means convert to UTF5 then insert "---" after first
> letter
> * double-hyphened UTF-8 means covert %XY to "X--Y"
> * and note a bare(trailing) hyphen never occurs in these
> * if in the unlikley event the original contains -- (or ---) then this is
> encoded as "----2" (or "----3")
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Examples:
> 
> nihongo.jp
> M---5E5M72COA9E.jp       (is in triple-hyphened UTF-5; note translation done
> on per label basis)
> 
> www.{alpha=\u3B1}{beta=\u3B2}.gr
> www.J---B1JB2.gr
> 
> {oe=\u0153}uf.fr
> For universal typing: %C5%93uf.fr
> For the network itself: C--59--3uf.fr (rather than H---53N5M6.fr)
> 
> feli{^c=\u0109}ulo
> For universal typing: feli%C4%89ulo (or even %66%65%6C%69%C4%89%75%6C%6F also
> allowed)
> For the network itself: feliC--48--9ulo (rather than the longer
> M---6M5MCM9H09N5MCMF)
> 
> ridanta-feli{^c=\u0109}ulo@{oe=\u0153}uf.fr
> ridanta-feliC--48--9ulo@C--59--3uf.fr
> 
> 
> 
> (BTW, will toplabel ever need Unicode?  If .store .web etc then yes)
> (BTW, rather than these two methods could we just use double-hyphened UTF-5 or
> would this not be compact enough for Latin languages?)
> 
> 
> 
> Comments welcome please.  Regards,
> Aaron Irvine
> (Belfast, Northern Ireland)
> --
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Aaron Irvine
>   mailto:airvine@corp.phone.com
> -----------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 2 March 2000 12:24:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:27 GMT