W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > October to December 2004

RE: New article for REVIEW: An Introduction to Multilingual Web Addresses

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:57:31 -0000
To: "'Mark Davis'" <mark.davis@jtcsv.com>, <www-international@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20041111185731.8F9334EFF4@homer.w3.org>

Hi Mark,

> From: Mark Davis [mailto:mark.davis@jtcsv.com] 
> Sent: 10 November 2004 22:30
> To: Richard Ishida; www-international@w3.org
> Subject: Re: New article for REVIEW: An Introduction to 
> Multilingual Web Addresses
> 
> Some quick items.
> 
> 1. A suggestion. As well as giving a transliterated name:
> 
> http://JPnatto.rei.jp/
> 
> give a translated name. Depending on the circumstances you 
> would have one or the other or both.
> 
> I don't know what the above means but a translated name might 
> be of the
> form:
> 
> http://JPFermentedSoyaBeans.jp
> 


Yes, I considered this, but then realised that I was thinking of a translation into English - which wouldn't help everyone, and may appear Western biased.  So in the end, I just left the transliteration.

(It's also a tricky question whether FermentedSoyaBeans is a good translation for a company selling natto.  It's an accurate description, but long and from a marketing perspective doesn't sound appetising ;-) )

('rei' means 'example')



> 2.
> >This document was submitted for consideration for the IETF standards 
> >track
> in May 2004 and has just completed Last Call, but has been in 
> development as an Internet Draft for some time.
> 
> It is odd to mention that it was in development for a long 
> time if it is in last call now. Disconcerting. Wouldn't you want:
> 
> This document was submitted for consideration for the IETF 
> standards track in May 2004 and has just completed Last Call.


Yes, this sentence was a fumbled attempt to say that despite the fact that it's not a standard it has been around long enough to influence various things.  I will wait to see what the status is at time of publication of this article, and rewrite the sentence.


> 
> 3. Additional problems
> It needs to be clearer that URI != IRI, and (at least from 
> what you say in the text), URIs are completely broken.


I couldn't see where you get the idea that URIs are completely broken in a non-specific sense.  It's true that they don't support non-ASCII characters, but when they are resolved for lookup IRIs are converted to URIs using the existing % escape mechanism. In fact, the worked example of 'Resolving a path' actually says that the 'string is now in URI form'.

> 
> 
> 
> ?Mark
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Ishida" <ishida@w3.org>
> To: <www-international@w3.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 12:15
> Subject: New article for REVIEW: An Introduction to 
> Multilingual Web Addresses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.w3.org/International/articles/idn-and-iri/
> 
> Comments are being sought on this article prior to final 
> release. Please
> send any comments to www-international@w3.org.
> 
> The article provides a high level introduction to the current 
> situation with
> regard to the use of multilingual Web addresses (URIs) for linking to
> resources on the Web. It tries to avoid getting too 
> technical, although it
> does attempt to explain some of the implementation detail in a simple
> fashion.
> 
> 
> ============
> Richard Ishida
> W3C
> 
> contact info:
> http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
> 
> W3C Internationalization:
> http://www.w3.org/International/
> 
> Publication blog:
> http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2004 18:57:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:17:04 GMT