W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > April 2014

RE: IDNA, IRIs, and ://..../ authority field

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 18:55:25 +0000
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
CC: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>, Martin Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>, "Dave Thaler (dthaler@microsoft.com)" <dthaler@microsoft.com>, "Robin Berjon (robin@w3.org)" <robin@w3.org>, Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <e4ba9c4024504ea7b9407746039a69e9@BL2PR02MB307.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
What is the idea for new schemes that want to use IDNs in the authority field? Is it to update the URL standard to include them in the list? Or are they not supported?  Should the registration template include some information about whether they're intended to have the host treated as an IDN?


-----Original Message-----
From: annevankesteren@gmail.com [mailto:annevankesteren@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Anne van Kesteren
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 10:26 AM
To: Larry Masinter
Cc: Phillips, Addison; Martin Dürst; Leif Halvard Silli; Dave Thaler (dthaler@microsoft.com); Robin Berjon (robin@w3.org); Mark Davis ☕; www-archive@w3.org
Subject: Re: IDNA, IRIs, and ://..../ authority field

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote:
> If 'hostname' is a non-ASCII string (IDN), should a processor trying to convert the IRI to a URI use punicode or %xx-hex-encoding for the authority segment?

Per the URL standard, this depends on the scheme.

>     http://url.spec.whatwg.org/  (Anne, Leif)

Just me.

>     has a fixed set of relative schemes: ftp, file, gopher (a mistake?), http, https, ws, wss
>    Uses IDNA 2003 not 2008
>    I'm not sure, but I think it re

Did you omit something here?

I talked with Mark a couple of weeks ago and will update the URL
standard to refer to UTS #46 and use it's transitional mode for IDNA
ToASCII and ToUnicode processing. I'm waiting for UTS #46 to be
refreshed this summer, but I could be persuaded to reference the draft
copy for a while.


Received on Tuesday, 8 April 2014 18:56:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:44:29 UTC