- From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 21:56:14 -0500
- To: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@acm.org>, "Roy Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>, "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
- Cc: <www-i18n-comments@w3.org>, <uri@w3.org>
Larry, I think a new URI WG and spec revision would be great as long as the public has read and write access to the lists. William, I think HTTP is out-of-scope for this discussion. We're talking about URIs which have a much wider usage and no versioning mechanism. Roy, I remember you saying something about adding a note that UTF-8 was standard in the new document (replacing "It is expected that a systematic treatment of character encoding within URI will be developed as a future modification of this specification.") but this got some people upset along the lines below: On Saturday, July 20, 2002, at 06:50 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Making such a change by fiat would be inappropriate. Some additional > information has to be passed by the client to preempt any inference of > the high-bit octet codes. Perhaps we could have some sort of signal, ala the Unicode BOM (Byte Order Marker) to show the encoding was UTF-8? -- Aaron Swartz [http://www.aaronsw.com] 4FAC4838B7D8D13FA6D92EDB4145521E79F0DF4B I will be in San Diego for the O'Reilly Open Source Convention the 24-26 July.
Received on Saturday, 20 July 2002 22:56:20 UTC