W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > November 2012

Re: [whatwg] New URL Standard from Anne van Kesteren on 2012-09-24 (public-whatwg-archive@w3.org from September 2012)

From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 18:53:58 +0900
Message-ID: <50978CB6.2050503@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
CC: David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>, Christophe Lauret <clauret@weborganic.com>, Jan Algermissen <jan.algermissen@nordsc.com>, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, URI <uri@w3.org>, "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>
Hello Anne,

[Removed ietf@ietf.org, because I'm discussing details.]

Sorry to be late with answering. I'm blaming a conference and the 
followup jetlag.

On 2012/10/25 22:54, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

> I aligned it with IRI now,

Great.

> apart from private Unicode ranges. Not
> really sure why we should ban them in one place and not in another.

Private Unicode ranges were originally banned everywhere, because they 
are not intended for public interchange. We allowed them in the query 
part, because sometimes you may want to use them as a payload. That's 
how we got to where we are. [If it interests you, this happened in 
August 2003, see http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-duerst-iri-03 and 
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-duerst-iri-03.txt.]

If you have a good reason to change that, please tell us.

Looking at the bigger picture, there are literally dozens groups of 
characters/codepoints like private use characters in Unicode that are 
almost never used, and almost always a bad idea, in IRIs. We could spend 
lots of hours discussing the merit of including or excluding them, but I 
think we can use our time for better stuff.

Regards,   Martin.
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 09:54:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:16 UTC