W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > May 2002

RE: Clarification of charmod-uri

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 09:25:42 +0100
To: "Graham Klyne" <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>, "Aaron Swartz" <me@aaronsw.com>
Cc: "RDF Core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDIEOFCDAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Graham Klyne
> Sent: 30 April 2002 18:22
> To: Aaron Swartz
> Cc: RDF Core; Jeremy Carroll
> Subject: Re: Clarification of charmod-uri
> 
> 
> At 01:55 PM 4/29/02 -0500, Aaron Swartz wrote:
> >On 2002-04-29 05:49 AM, "Graham Klyne" 
> <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> 1) Is there some reason why these Unicode characters cannot 
> be %encoded? I
> > > The reason I heard was that the I18N group would like the 
> user's original
> > > character input to be preserved as much as possible.  If 
> %-encoding is
> > > applied, it's not possible to tell if the user supplied it of the 
> > application.
> >
> >This doesn't make any sense to me. Why would the application introduce
> >%-encoded characters, and if it did, couldn't it introduce them 
> even if the
> >URI was not %-encoded?
> 
> What I was trying to say is that if the reading application is 
> required to 
> convert Unicode URIs to %-escaped form to satisfy a requirement for 
> US-ASCII only in the RDF, then information about exactly what the user 
> supplied is lost.
> 
> (But I may well have misunderstood this ... I'm not set to defend this, 
> just trying to explain what I thought I heard.)
> 

This is a concern of the I18N guys.

Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2002 04:26:36 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:48:13 EDT