W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-iri@w3.org > May 2004

Re: draft-duerst-iri-07.txt: 2 week mailing list last call

From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 13:01:49 +0100
Message-Id: <>
To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>, public-iri@w3.org

I'm sure your right.  This wasn't a particularly helpful comment on my part 
and should probably be closed without further action.


At 18:25 12/05/04 +0900, Martin Duerst wrote:
>Hello Graham,
>This is my last reply. Many thanks again for your comments.
>This is issue needAPI-34.
>At 12:02 04/05/10 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote:
>>Finally, I find myself being vaguely concerned about the complexity and 
>>subtlety of this specification.  I expect that a lot of software will be 
>>written by programmers who are not aware of the various subtle 
>>implications of I18N issues.  As such, will it be a realistic expectation 
>>for such programmers to write robust interoperable software based on this 
>>specification.  Or, another way of addressing this concern:  to what 
>>extent can the various subtleties described here be wrapped up in a 
>>library that can be used successfully by a programmer who is not expert 
>>in I18N issues?
>>(I think part of the difficulty here is the extent to which IRIs straddle 
>>wire-protocol and user presentation concerns.  I don't normally advocate 
>>the idea of standardized APIs, but wonder if this is a case for which 
>>defining a common API might help to flush out some of these concerns.)
>We have already seen implementations of IRIs in various browsers
>(Opera, Safari, IE (with the exception of IDN), Amaya, Netscape).
>Nobody from these implementers has every mentioned the need for
>an API, at least not to me.
>In many cases I guess APIs for URIs are reused by making use
>of the fact that IRIs essentially work the same way as URIs,
>and in many programming languages these days representing
>Unicode is no longer that much of a problem.
>There may be other applications than browser that have other
>needs. But I'm not sure we could guess their needs now.
>If there turns out to be a need for an API in some area in
>the future, I'm confident this can be addressed as a separate
>Regards,     Martin.

Graham Klyne
For email:
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2004 09:26:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:14:31 UTC