- From: Keld J|rn Simonsen <keld@dkuug.dk>
- Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 22:54:23 +0200
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Francois Yergeau <yergeau@alis.com>
- Cc: uri@bunyip.com, bert@w3.org
Dan Connolly writes: > On the one hand, it makes a lot of sense that if a user creates > a file and gives it a hebrew or arabic or CJK name, and then exports > the file via an HTTP server, that the Address: field in a web > browser should show the hebrew or arabic or ... characters faithfully. > > On the other hand, suppose that address is to be printed and put > in an advertisement or a magazine article. Should it print the > hebrew/arabic/CJK characters using those glyphs? > Or should it print ASCII glyphs corresponding to the characters > of the %xx encoding of the original characters? To me there is no doubt: we need to just have the right characters in there, not the %XX thing. URLs are now used routinely in advertisement and in radio and TV. Imagine a radio speaker reading aloud the %XX sequence. ... simply does not fly. Also this is in accordance with the URL being abstract characters and not representing any encoding. Regards Keld
Received on Monday, 14 April 1997 16:54:42 UTC