- From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 16:11:27 +0500
- To: public-bpmlod@w3.org, "Jose Emilio Labra Gayo" <jelabra@gmail.com>
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 00:28:03 +0500, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com> wrote: > During today's meeting, there was an issue raised with one of the > patterns/best practices. > > The pattern was called "Internationalized local names" to refer to > examples where the domain name is restricted to ASCII characters while > local names allow Unicode characters like: > > > > The question that was raised was about the definition of local names. There are a couple of possible variations: http://example.org/ascii-path#Õ€Õ¡ÕµÕ¡Õ½Õ¿Õ¡Õ¶ would mean we are talking about a "Fragment". Alternatively we might mean something like http://example.org/Õ€Õ¡ÕµÕ¡Õ½Õ¿#Õ¡Õ¶ In which case we have localised "Path" and "Fragment" > I am not aware of a concise definition of local names in this context. There are various URL specs. In this case I think RFC 3986 gives definitions that we can happily use. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3 cheers Chaals > Does anyone have a suggestion on how we could rename this approach? Or > how to define what a local name is in this context? > > Another possibility would be to remove this practice from the table. > However, in my opinion, it is good to document this practice because > it is employed, for example, by DBPedia International. > > The goal of this practice is to maintain the domain name in ASCII > characters to avoid the visual spoofing attacks while being more > liberal in the local names, allowing Unicode characters. > > Any suggestions? > > -- Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Wednesday, 18 September 2013 20:12:00 UTC