W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > March 2003

Re: Comments on section 2 of RFC2396bis

From: Chris Haynes <chris@harvington.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:45:39 -0000
Message-ID: <006001c2e54f$1a6d8f40$0200000a@ringo>
To: "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>, <uri@w3.org>

 "Tim Bray" proposed:

....

> - ASCII characters which may legally appear in the component MUST
>  appear directly as themselves, i.e. 'a' may not be encoded as %61.

..

My understanding is that the decision on whether or not an ASCII
character 'may legally appear' (at any particular position in the URI)
is not at all well defined and is scheme-specific.

Witness the several recent requests to this list by Israel Viente re:
file:/e:/xxx.pdf  versus  file:/e%3a/xxx.pdf and the like - I don't
think anyone was able to give him quick, unambiguous answers.

Unless and until the URI RFC _and_ all schemes can be shown to have
completely unambiguous syntaxes in this respect, developers will have
to 'play safe' and escape questionable characters.

So, much as I respect absolutism in specifications, I don't believe
'MUST' can be used here.


Chris Haynes
Received on Saturday, 8 March 2003 03:49:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:05 UTC