W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > April to June 2011

RE: HTML5 and Unicode Normalization Form C

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 04:21:45 -0400
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
CC: "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A592E245B36A8949BDB0A302B375FB4E0AC29AEA1D@MAILR001.mail.lan>
> Koji Ishii, Sun, 29 May 2011 22:10:29 -0400:
> > It looks like all Leif cares is URL.
> All? As in "nothing more than"?

Ah...I apologize if it sounded like offending, I wanted to say examples you raised were related with URLs. I'm still not sure if my wording was offending probably due to my English skill, but if you felt anything bad, that wasn't my intention. I apologize that.

> > I think it'd make sense for HTML5 spec and validator to follow
> > URL/IRI spec for attributes that contain URL/IRI.
> Do you expect text editors to encode content of attributes differnetly
> from content of other parts of the text file?

Yes for validators. URL/IRI has syntax like encoding using "%", so validation of attribute values using its data type makes sense to me. If it wasn't the goal of the HTML5 validator, or if I'm asking too much, I'm sorry for that.

But you're right that it could be a hard requirement for editors. If we take it seriously, I guess we have to wait Unicode to fix NFC problems (I heard the effort is going on) or to ask web browsers/servers to normalize on the fly. All options we have today have trade-offs, and I just wanted you to be aware of that normalizing whole contents today can harm some scripts.

> > Whether to apply NFC/NFD to whole contents or not seems to be a
> > little separate issue to me.
> This thread started on www-validator@ and did not speak about "whole
> contents" or not - it only dealt with the fact that the HTML5 validator
> issued an error for non-NFC content. I have also seen that same error,
> and I thought - then - that it was based on HTML5.
> However, it has to be said that it was only after Andreas Prilop
> pointed out that the HTML5 validator issues the same error message
> inside as well as outside attributes, that I understood that it - in
> contrast to what I thought - was not a restriction that was
> particularly related to links.
> As it has turned out, however, it was an error of the HTML5 validator
> to show an error for use of NFC. But *that* only increases the
> importance of offer helpful recommendations w.r.t. links.

Thank you for the explanation of the background I wasn't aware of. I agree that links have problems you raised, and NFC can solve it. All I want you to understand is that applying NFC to displayable contents has some different problems, so what we said do not contradict to each other I think, and I wanted to find a solution that can make both of us happy.

Received on Monday, 30 May 2011 08:21:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:40:59 UTC