W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-i18n-comments@w3.org > July 2002

RE: proposed charter items for possible URI working group

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 01:58:34 +0900
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20020722015509.03dad580@localhost>
To: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@acm.org>, "'William A. Rowe, Jr.'" <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>, "'Chris Haynes'" <chris@harvington.org.uk>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>, <www-i18n-comments@w3.org>

At 18:40 02/07/20 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote:

>I think you're asking a fairly confusing question.
>
>I was asked to propose a charter for a group to update
>the URI spec, and I proposed *NOT* introducing -- into
>the same specification -- the IRI concepts. An IRI isn't
>a URI, it's something else. They're related, but different.

I agree. Pointing out the relationships in the new URI spec
is a good idea, but the two specs should stay separate
(in particular also because the IRI spec is further
along the path than the URI update).


>Whether one wants to create a version of HTTP which
>uses IRIs instead of URIs is a completely separate
>issue which the IRI group might consider but would
>be out of scope for the URI update.

Well, rather than the 'IRI group' (which is actually
the W3C Internationalization WG), this should be
considered by the HTTP folks.


>Since "uri@w3.org" seems to be open to more general
>discussions, perhaps we need another list whose focus
>is the narrower topic of URI update.

For the moment, I think using the same list is okay.
If we get a real WG, we can create a new list. I guess
W3C may be able to host it.

Regards,   Martin.
Received on Monday, 22 July 2002 08:20:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:32:32 GMT