- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 12:03:00 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Fri, 12 Jul 2013, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> But then we shouldn't garble pathname either and we do because we have >> to. So I'm not sure that line of reasoning makes sense. I do think we >> should offer some kind of conversion utility between the two. > > It is unfortunate that resolving URLs does that, it's true. But just > because we're constrained here, why should we mess up domains also? Consistency. It means the entire URL is effectively a byte sequence. And it's very clear what the DNS lookup will be. And given that they keep insisting on changing what certain code points map to over in IETF-land (with limited support from browser vendors :/), it seems safer too. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2013 11:03:29 UTC