Re: Feedback on draft-gregorio-uritemplate-00

James M Snell schrieb:
> These don't need to be addressed in the URI Template spec.  Definitely
> in the IRI Template spec tho (I really need to get that draft done).
> 
> For a *URI* Template, folks who want to encode non-ASCII characters into
> a template name should likely do so by percent-encoding the characters
> (assuming UTF-8) to produce a proper ASCII-only name.  However, given
> that the spec does not define equivalence for template-names, template
> processors should probably not assume that a template name
> "r%C3%A9sum%C3%A9" is equivalent to "résumé".  The application providing
> the replacement values, however, likely could treat these as being the same.
> 
> For the IRI template specification, my current thinking is that template
> names will be expanded to include the and iunreserved / iprivate range
> as defined by RFC3987 and MUST be stored/transmitted in logical order
> with no bidi control characters.  The IRI templates MAY be rendered
> using the same rules defined for IRI's.

Hi James,

funny enough, I was just going to ask for IRI templates... :-)

Now if we defined IRI templates, why would we ever need a separate URI 
template spec?

Best regards, Julian