- From: Jonathan Rosenne <Jonathan_Rosenne@CompuServe.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 00:59:28 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Francois Yergeau <yergeau@alis.com>, "[unknown]" <uri@bunyip.com>, "[unknown]" <bert@w3.org>
Message text written by Dan Connolly >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? Clearly, a Hebrew URL is intended for the Hebrew reader, who will have no problem in reading it and typing it. A Hebrew page intended for an international audience may be expected to have an English (ASCII) URL. >(I'm not saying that everybody knows english, but rather >that a person using a computer connected to the internet >has a farily high probablility of being able to match >the 'a' character on a peice of paper to the 'a' character >on the keyboard.) Don't underestimate the difficulty people in other countries have with ASCII and the Latin script. It is for many a foreign script, just as Hebrew/Arabic/CJK to most westerners. Even if they are educated and know it, it is less familiar than their own script. As the use of computers spreads to non-professional users and to school children, the need for local URLs will increase. Jonathan
Received on Tuesday, 15 April 1997 01:00:22 UTC