Re: uri templates: NFKC or NFC

• From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
• Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 11:34:15 +0900
• To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
• CC: URI <uri@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <4E1FA727.1000201@it.aoyama.ac.jp>

On 2011/07/15 8:31, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> The URI Templates draft currently requires use of the NFKC for
> normalization of Unicode strings.  I've never understood why
> that is, considering that IRI does no require it and
> browsers appear to use NFC (if anything).  Also, it should only
> apply to the expansions -- the literal parts don't need to be
> normalized.
>
> Should I change it to NFC?

Hello Roy,

NFKC is heavily used in IDNA, but it's not the whole story, and just 
doing NFKC for the domain-name part doesn't make sense to me. For the 
rest, I'd definitely go with NFC (as opposed to NFKC), for the reasons 
you gave.

Regards,    Martin.

Received on Friday, 15 July 2011 02:35:28 UTC