W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-iri@w3.org > July 2011

Re: How browsers display URIs with %-encoding (Opera/Firefox FAIL)

From: Chris Weber <chris@lookout.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:24:13 -0700
Message-ID: <4E3049BD.3080808@lookout.net>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:14:42 UTC