- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2012 09:42:36 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: public-iri@w3.org
* Mark Nottingham wrote: >I tend to agree with Peter. >[...] This doesn't really help me understand where you see problems with IRIs. Could you take a simple example like http://björn.höhrmann.de/ and tell me of some places where I should be unable to use that even though I can use http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de/ in the same place, without arguing about limitations of deployed protocols, software, or hardware, and without arguing about issues that would arise anyway when displaying URIs, and why I should be unable to use the non-URI IRI there? Unhelpful arguments in the sense above would be "HTTP/2.0 should stick to URIs because using IRIs there is a hassle when HTTP/2.0 implementa- tions interact with HTTP/1.1 implementations", as that relies on limi- tations of HTTP/1.1 implementations, or "IRIs with zero-width spaces can be confused with ones without such spaces" as you'd have the same issue when you turn URIs into IRIs "for display", and so on. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2012 07:43:05 UTC