- From: Wil Tan <wil@dready.org>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 02:58:07 +1000
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: "PUBLIC-IRI@W3.ORG" <PUBLIC-IRI@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <b789c2f00908300958x646d64bs2be7d27d900d9a52@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote: > I’m reading this text over and over again, and I really don’t get it. Can > someone explain what the distinction is between “scheme definition does not > allow percent-encoding for ireg-name, and scheme definition DOES allow > percent-encoding for ireg-name”? What schemes allow percent-encoding for > ireg-name, for example? > RFC3986 allows percent encodings in the "reg-name" subcomponent, but some URI schemes do not allow it. Given that most URI schemes are defined in terms of URI rather than IRI, the "ireg-name" probably should be "reg-name" here. > Not sure what problem this is solving, or why the two algorithms are > different, or whether one is just a shortcut in a special case. > Which two algorithms, you mean "percent encoding" and IDNA ToASCII? I suppose the former is a generic way of encoding non-ASCII characters in the reg-name field of a URI, and the latter is used when one knows for sure that the reg-name uses DNS. =wil > ================================================= > > > > Systems accepting IRIs MAY convert the ireg-name component of an IRI as > follows (before step 2 above) for schemes known to use domain names in > ireg-name, if the scheme definition does not allow percent-encoding for > ireg-name: Replace the ireg-name part of the IRI by the part converted using > the ToASCII operation specified in Section 4.1 of [RFC3490] (Faltstrom, > P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, “Internationalizing Domain Names in > Applications (IDNA),” March 2003.)<http://larry.masinter.net/draft-duerst-iri-bis.html#RFC3490>on each dot-separated label, and by using U+002E (FULL STOP) as a label > separator, with the flag UseSTD3ASCIIRules set to TRUE, and with the flag > AllowUnassigned set to FALSE for creating IRIs and set to TRUE otherwise. > The ToASCII operation may fail, but this would mean that the IRI cannot be > resolved. This conversion SHOULD be used when the goal is to maximize > interoperability with legacy URI resolvers. For example, the IRI > "http://résumé.example.org" > may be converted to > "http://xn--rsum-bpad.example.org" > instead of > "http://r%C3%A9sum%C3%A9.example.org". > > An IRI with a scheme that is known to use domain names in ireg-name, but > where the scheme definition does not allow percent-encoding for ireg-name, > meets scheme-specific restrictions if either the straightforward conversion > or the conversion using the ToASCII operation on ireg-name result in an URI > that meets the scheme-specific restrictions. > > > > > > -- > > http://larry.masinter.net > > >
Received on Sunday, 30 August 2009 16:58:43 UTC