- From: Chris Weber <chris@lookout.net>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:24:13 -0700
- To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- CC: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>
On 7/27/2011 3:15 AM, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote: > There was a proposal to use something like %uXXXX (XXXX being a > hexadecimal Unicode code point value) in URIs, and I guess that would > have been to your liking. There was even some support for that in some > version of JavaScript, I guess it's still there because such stuff dies > slowly. I guess it's something like this that you are talking about. > However, that didn't work well, because the server side (in particular > Apache on Unix/Linux) essentially works with bytes and not with > characters. That discussion was done something like 14 or so years ago. > Microsoft IIS Web server has supported %uXXXX notation for many years and still does in its current version. You can see limited support for this at Bing: <http://www.bing.com/search?q=%u0041%u0042%u0043> Limited meaning something in the configuration seems to be falling back on code points greater than %u007f. You can see more obvious support at: <http://search.microsoft.com/Results.aspx?q=I%u2665Unicode&mkt=en-US> And at other applications built on .NET, who may not even realize this notation is supported: <http://stackoverflow.com/search?q=%u263a> -Chris Weber
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2011 17:24:49 UTC