Re: "semantics" of URI

On Saturday, June 7, 2003, at 10:29  AM, Graham Klyne wrote:
> I think that's an improvement.  A small suggestion for your 
> consideration:
>
>   s/efficient/effective/
>
> (The rationale is to steer slightly away a possible implication that 
> this is simply a performance issue.)

It is simply a performance issue.

> I also noticed the double negative is harder to read, so maybe:
> [[
> Therefore, unreserved characters should not be escaped unless the URI 
> is being used in a context that forbids such characters to appear.
> ]]

Sounds good to me.

....Roy

Received on Thursday, 3 July 2003 10:59:50 UTC