- From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 06:18:59 +0200
- To: uri@w3.org
Bruce Lilly wrote:
>> URIC encoding is a simple algorithm, really.
> Under RFC 2396 rules, where "reserved", "excluded", etc.
> characters are explicitly and reasonably clearly defined.
> Not so simple for the RFC 3986 rules, unfortunately.
JFTR, I never got a reply about my questions on the 822-list
with respect to this matter and Martin's Archived-At draft -03
in <http://mid.gmane.org/42212FB4.5AE1@xyzzy.claranet.de>
My guess based on STD 66 was:
uri-char = %d33 / %d35-59 / ; printable ASCII
%d61 / %d63-91 / ; excl. DQUOTE, "<", ">"
%d93 / %d95 / ; excl. "\", "^", "`"
%d97-122 / %d126 ; excl. "{", "|", "}"
But maybe I got it completely wrong. Without kowing what
STD 66 actually means I'm unable to comment something like...
newsgroup-name = %x22-29 / %x2B / %x2D-3E / %x40-5A / %x5E-7E
...found in draft-lindsey-news-nntp-uri-00, which of these
characters need to be escaped in an URL ?
> the caveat above re. 3986 vs. 2396.
s/caveat/PITA/ But for the mailto: I-D the assumption that
MUAs support UTF-8 for the mailto: body= parameter is worse.
Bye, Frank
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2005 04:22:29 UTC