Re: [iri] #128: use of the term 'origin'

Perhaps it doesn't belong in 3987bis, then, but instead in a spec about
internationalization in HTML.

On 6/16/12 9:28 AM, Larry Masinter wrote:
> does this apply to any format other than HTML? I'm not sure that this
> applies to anything else... Within image/svg+xml, for example? The
> notion of document charset doesn't apply to some formats.
> 
> /Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless/
> 
> 
> -----Original message-----
> 
>     *From: *iri issue tracker <trac+iri@grenache.tools.ietf.org>*
>     To: *"draft-ietf-iri-3987bis@tools.ietf.org"
>     <draft-ietf-iri-3987bis@tools.ietf.org>, "stpeter@stpeter.im"
>     <stpeter@stpeter.im>*
>     Cc: *"public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>*
>     Sent: *Mon, Jun 11, 2012 19:38:45 GMT+00:00*
>     Subject: *Re: [iri] #128: use of the term 'origin'
> 
>     #128: use of the term 'origin'
> 
>     #choose ticket.new
>       #when True
>      While reviewing 3987bis for i18n terminology, I came across this
>      paragraph (Section 3.5):
> 
>         For compatibility with existing deployed HTTP infrastructure, the
>         following special case applies for schemes "http" and "https" and
>         IRIs whose origin has a document charset other than one which is
>     UCS-
>         based (e.g., UTF-8 or UTF-16).  In such a case, the "query"
>     component
>         of an IRI is mapped into a URI by using the document charset rather
>         than UTF-8 as the binary representation before pct-encoding.  This
>         mapping is not applied for any other scheme or component.
> 
>      The term 'origin' could be ambiguous here. It doesn't seem to be
>      referencing the Web Origin Concept (RFC 6454) but instead seems to be
>      based on the "document" (broadly construed) in which the http or https
>      URL is found (e.g., as a hyperlink in an HTML document or perhaps as
>      running text in an email message). It would be good to make that clear.
>       #end
>       #otherwise
>         #if changes_body
>     Changes (by stpeter@…):
> 
> 
>         #end
>         #if changes_descr
>           #if not changes_body and not change.comment and change.author
>     Description changed by stpeter@…:
>           #end
> 
>     --
>         #end
>         #if change.comment
> 
>     Comment(by stpeter@…):
> 
>      One way to remove the ambiguity would be to change "origin" here to
>      something else, but even then I think we'd need additional text. I
>      tentatively propose the following:
> 
>         For compatibility with existing deployed HTTP infrastructure, the
>         following special case applies for the schemes "http" and "https"
>         when an IRI is found in a document whose charset is not based on UCS
>         (e.g., not UTF-8 or UTF-16).  In such a case, the "query" component
>         of an IRI is mapped into a URI by using the document charset rather
>         than UTF-8 as the binary representation before pct-encoding.  This
>         mapping is not applied for any other scheme or component.
>         #end
>       #end
>     #end
> 
>     -- 
>     -----------------------+---------------------------------------
>      Reporter:  stpeter@…  |       Owner:  draft-ietf-iri-3987bis@…
>          Type:  defect     |      Status:  new
>      Priority:  minor      |   Milestone:
>     Component:  3987bis    |     Version:
>      Severity:  -          |  Resolution:
>      Keywords:             |
>     -----------------------+---------------------------------------
> 
>     Ticket URL:
>     <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/iri/trac/ticket/128#comment:1>
>     iri <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/iri/>
>

Received on Monday, 18 June 2012 15:58:26 UTC