- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 17:05:56 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1524 ------- Additional Comments From mike@saxonica.com 2005-07-22 17:05 ------- Here's an attempt to clarify this confusing subject. Currently, the serialization specification, when describing URI escaping for the HTML output method, does indeed contain a reference to XLink; but the detailed algorithm described is actually by design identical to that described in Appendix B.2.1 of the HTML 4.01 specification: http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/appendix/notes.html#non-ascii-chars People have often asked why we escape non-ASCII characters rather than escaping the characters listed in the XLink specification; it seems useful therefore to reference the HTML algorithm rather than the XLink algorithm, since that is the one we are using. (The practical reason for choosing this algorithm is that using the XLink algorithm doesn't work: in particular, it breaks many Javascript URIs in typical browsers). This proposal (which the WGs have accepted) makes the algorithm which is currently built-in to the serializer available as a user-callable function, so that applications can invoke it when they need it and use a different algorithm when they don't. As a result of this proposal, there is a new F+O function which refers to the HTML 4.01 specification, and the serialization specification will refer to this new F+O function to describe the default serialization behavior. Does this make things clearer? Michael Kay (personal response)
Received on Friday, 22 July 2005 17:05:58 UTC