- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:52:46 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, public-iri@w3.org
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:10:18 +0200, Martin J. Dürst > <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote: >> Any better idea for a name? I find "needs to be used" a bit too >> strong, but I guess it's the users' choice, not ours. > > HTML5 re-used the term URL. That worked for me. I'm not sure why "needs > to be used" is a bit too strong. Browsers handle URLs the same > everywhere. (Admittedly outside HTML context the encoding is often just > set to UTF-8 by default, but that is not the only part of the algorithm > that matters.) ...but that's the main difference to LEIRIs, as specified, right? Julian (still hoping that we're not going to define *two* supersets of IRIs)
Received on Thursday, 10 September 2009 08:53:37 UTC