Re: proposed charter items for possible URI working group

Larry, I think a new URI WG and spec revision would be great as long as 
the public has read and write access to the lists.

William, I think HTTP is out-of-scope for this discussion. We're talking 
about URIs which have a much wider usage and no versioning mechanism.

Roy, I remember you saying something about adding a note that UTF-8 was 
standard in the new document (replacing "It is expected that a 
systematic treatment of character encoding within URI will be developed 
as a future modification of this specification.") but this got some 
people upset along the lines below:

On Saturday, July 20, 2002, at 06:50  PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Making such a change by fiat would be inappropriate.  Some additional 
> information has to be passed by the client to preempt any inference of 
> the high-bit octet codes.

Perhaps we could have some sort of signal, ala the Unicode BOM (Byte 
Order Marker) to show the encoding was UTF-8?

--
Aaron Swartz [http://www.aaronsw.com] 
4FAC4838B7D8D13FA6D92EDB4145521E79F0DF4B
I will be in San Diego for the O'Reilly Open Source Convention the 24-26 
July.