Re: [iri] #5: Separate IRI from "presentation of IRI" as concepts

Hello Peter,

On 2011/11/12 8:35, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> <hat type='individual'/>
>
> Section 1.1 of rfc3987bis has the following paragraph:
>
> URIs are used both as a protocol element (for transmission and
> processing by software) and also a presentation element (for display
> and handling by people who read, interpret, coin, or guess them).
> The transition between these roles is more difficult and complex when
> dealing with the larger set of characters than allowed for URIs in
> [RFC3986].
>
> In Issue #5, Larry suggested a change...
>
> "... processing by software) and also as the basis for presentation
> (for display and handling by people who read, interpret,
> coin, or guess them). The transition between protocol element
> and presentation is more difficult and complex when..."

It was my impression that Larry wanted to change the other way, i.e. to 
strengthen the difference between the IRI itself (the "thing", and maybe 
its electronic representation) and the "presentation of an IRI" (visual 
or auditory).

Larry, can you tell us what you wanted?

Regards,   Martin.


> That seems reasonable to me. I see only a few related modifications:
>
> 1. In Section 1.3, delete this definition:
>
> presentation element: A presentation form corresponding to a
> protocol element; for example, using a wider range of characters.
>
> 2. In Section 7.2, change this:
>
> A person viewing a visual representation of an IRI
>
> to:
>
> A person viewing a visual presentation of an IRI
>
> Peter
>

Received on Monday, 14 November 2011 09:05:20 UTC