- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 20:46:28 +1100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 10/12/2008, at 8:36 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > Mark Nottingham wrote: >> On 02/12/2008, at 2:54 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> - We miss a "I18N Considerations" Section. It probably should >>> mention IRIs in general, and how to I18Nize the title parameter (- >>> > RFC 2231???) >> How about: >> <t>The title parameter is used to label the destination of a >> link such that it can be used >> as identification within a human-readable menu. The title >> parameter MAY have character set >> and language information present as per <xref >> target="RFC2231"/>.</t> >> ... > > It's good for telling people where to go when they need it. It may > not be sufficient for ensuring that recipients actually implement it. Yes, I had that feeling too, but failed to find a good way to express requirements. > Also note that RFC 2231 encoding affects the grammar. What's standard practice -- to explicitly call out the * form in the ABNF? > > That being said, I already volunteered to profile and clarify RFC > 2231 for use in HTTP, but I'm not there yet (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-rfc2231-in-http-latest.html > >). > > If we can reach agreement that it's sufficient to support only some > parts of RFC 2231 (no continuations, no charsets other than > ISO8859-1 and UTF-8), I can try to condense that statement into a > very short paragraph. Please do. -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2008 09:47:13 UTC