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

RE: How browsers display IRI's with mixed encodings

From: Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 23:05:03 -0700
To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Leif H Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
CC: "chris@lookout.net" <chris@lookout.net>, "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>
Message-ID: <131F80DEA635F044946897AFDA9AC3476A94A577D6@EX-SEA31-D.ant.amazon.com>
> 
> > But I snipped that you said that %FC should be in wide use. And if
> > that is the case, then there could be a lot of legacy content out
> > there which Firefox is motivated to give a fake character display for, no?
> > But how commonly are -or where- e.g. %FC used to point to a
> > "ü-resource"? Not often, I think. Non-ascii is avoided, even today.
> 
> It's definitely first and foremost ASCII only. After that, I don't have any statistics.
> Maybe somebody from Google has some?
> 

For static links to static resources, sure. But REST (for example) has been with us for a while. Non-ASCII is avoidable in a static resource world, which is no longer the most common kind of resource on the Web.

Addison
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 06:05:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:39:43 UTC