W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > June 2003

Re: "semantics" of URI

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2003 09:29:36 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030607092241.0651ada8@127.0.0.1>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>

I think that's an improvement.  A small suggestion for your consideration:

   s/efficient/effective/

(The rationale is to steer slightly away a possible implication that this 
is simply a performance issue.)

I also noticed the double negative is harder to read, so maybe:
[[
Therefore, unreserved characters should not be escaped unless the URI is 
being used in a context that forbids such characters to appear.
]]

(I don't feel strongly -- these are just suggestions.)

#g
--

At 14:57 06/06/03 -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

>I have changed
>
>   Unreserved characters can be escaped without changing the semantics
>   of a URI, but this should not be done unless the URI is being used
>   in a context that does not allow the unescaped character to appear.
>
>to
>
>   Escaping unreserved characters in a URI does not change what resource is
>   identified by that URI.  However, it may change the result of a
>   URI comparison (section 6), potentially leading to
>   less efficient actions by an application.  Therefore, unreserved
>   characters should not be escaped unless the URI is being used in a
>   context that does not allow the unescaped character to appear.
>
>....Roy

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9  A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E
Received on Saturday, 7 June 2003 04:36:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:31 GMT