- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 15:58:26 -0400
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: public-iri@w3.org
Hello Bjoern, As I haven't heard from you on this issue, I'm assuming that you are satisfied with my explanations and herewith close this issue. Regards, Martin. At 11:36 03/04/30 -0400, Martin Duerst wrote: >Hello Bjoern, > >Many thanks for this and other comments on the IRI spec. > >At 05:23 03/04/29 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>Section 6.3: >> >> "Note: Some formats already accommodate IRIs, although they use >> different terminology. HTML 4.0 [HTML4] defines the conversion from >> IRIs to URIs as error-avoiding behavior." >> >>HTML 4.0 does not accomodate IRIs, HTML 4.0 defines the value of the >>href, src, etc. attributes as URI References as per RFC 2396, a document >>using IRIs that are not legal URI References is thus invalid. HTML does >>indeed recommend an error recovery behaivour, but nothing beyond that. > >I have noted this as issue http://www.w3.org/International/iri-edit#htmlIRI-12 > >I think the term 'accommodate' is rather loose, and the text >points out that for HTML 4.0, this is just error behavior. >So I don't thing that there is anything wrong with the current >text. >If you think that the current text needs some changes, can you >please propose actual wording? > >Also, please note that formally (in the DTD), all the relevant >fields are defined as CDATA. This means that validation doesn't >catch IRIs, and documents containing IRIs, while not conforming >to the HTML 4.0 spec, are therefore not invalid. > > >Regards, Martin.
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2003 15:58:42 UTC