W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2003

Re: [Minutes] 14 Apr 2003 TAG teleconf (URIEquivalence-15, IRIEverywhere-27, xmlIDSemantics-32, abstractComponentRefs-37, namespaceDocument-8)

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:00:05 +0200
Message-ID: <798306000.20030415230005@w3.org>
To: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
CC: www-tag@w3.org

On Tuesday, April 15, 2003, 5:51:05 PM, Ian wrote:


IBJ> Hello,

IBJ> The minutes of the 14 Apr 2003 TAG teleconf are
IBJ> available as HTML [1] and as text below.

I note that frequently in this transcript, the word 'canonicalize'
has been used, sometimes to mean canonicalize (as per RFC2396bis) and
sometimes to mean hexify. Its really not clear that these are the same
thing. in particular, the canonical form of an IRI is the full
original unicode characters, now whatever you have to do to jam it
down a 7-bit pipe.

Just to note that sometimes, what I have said was not fully captured
or was slightly misrepresented. Often I said hexify and the transcript
says canonicalize. I didn't spot this at the time, because there was a
lot of fast and sometimes parallel discussion.

To quote martin

MD: IRI spec says explicitly "You don't do this unless you have to."

I would not like people to get the impression from reading these
minutes that i am in favour of 'canonicalizing' IRIs by hexifying
them. Like Martin says and like the IRI spec says, only do this as a
last resort when using antiquated transport protocols. Better is to
use whatever method (quoted-unreadable, base64, ncr, \u) the
environment provides to preserve the original characters.

-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2003 17:00:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:17 GMT