- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:12:56 -0700
- To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
- CC: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, "plh@w3.org" <plh@w3.org>, "Peter Saint-Andre (stpeter@stpeter.im)" <stpeter@stpeter.im>, "Pete Resnick (presnick@qualcomm.com)" <presnick@qualcomm.com>, "Martin Dürst (duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp)" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
I think it would be useful to find a system that requires general IRI syntax to be more constrained. Of course, individual schemes can constrain their syntax in a scheme-specific way (making anything that doesn't match the scheme template invalid-as-instance-of-scheme even if valid-as-IRI). And individual contexts (like "space separated list of IRIs") can provide additional constraints ("before adding an IRI to a space separated list of IRIs, replace all spaces with %20"). But those kinds of rules are layered on top of 3987(bis). I'd like to talk out some of these things in Atlanta, should we try to make it a separate (bar) bof, or try to use the IRI working group time to talk about this? > -----Original Message----- > From: Ted Hardie [mailto:ted.ietf@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 1:00 PM > To: Larry Masinter > Cc: Robin Berjon; Anne van Kesteren; plh@w3.org; Peter Saint-Andre > (stpeter@stpeter.im); Pete Resnick (presnick@qualcomm.com); "Martin Dürst > (duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp)"; www-archive@w3.org > Subject: Re: URL work in HTML 5 > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> > wrote: > > > I think that's the bigger implication -- the vision that the web supplants all > other (network) apps; for some systems, "URLs to non-Web things" is an empty > set. > > > > My understanding of Peter's survey of other specs that make reference to > RFC 3987 was that there weren't any whose implementations relied on anything > other than the browser to do URL/IRI resolution and processing. > > > > First, can you provide a pointer to the survey? > > Second, while there may be systems for which the only handle for URIs > is the the browser, there are certainly systems for which that is not > true. To pick one produced close to when URIs became a full standard, > look at RFC 4088 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4088). I doubt there > are many browsers which dereference URIs like > snmp://example.com/bridge1;800002b804616263 with their own handlers. > > URIs used internally to systems outside the web may not be easily seen > in a web-based corpus, but that does not mean that they are not there, > nor that shifting the parsing rules won't effect them. > > regards, > > Ted Hardie
Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2012 07:13:32 UTC