- From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 09:36:22 +0200
- To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
- Cc: public-iri@w3.org, evnikita2@gmail.com
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote: > On 1/10/12 5:36 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> Section 1: > > [RFC3987] introduced IRIs by defining a mapping between URIs > and IRIs; [RFC3987bis] updates that definition, allowing an > IRI to be interpreted directly without translating into a URI. > > I actually don't see RFC 3987 requiring an IRI to be translated to URI > under any circumstances. Current implementations of IRIs, under RFC > 3987, work perfectly without mapping any IRI to URI. So I think this > statement should be changed to: I read this text as referring to the applicability section in RFC 3987 (Section 1.2), which does explicitly say "The compatibility is provided by specifying a well-defined and deterministic mapping from the IRI character sequence to the functionally equivalent URI character sequence." This goes back to our long-running "Presentation format/new protocol element type" discussion, in other words. I'm not honestly sure that we need this history in the document at all. "This document updates the definition of IRIs originally provided in RFC 3987" seems to sidestep the whole thing. Ted
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2012 07:36:51 UTC