- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 19:57:33 +0200
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>
- Cc: Lina Kemmel <LKEMMEL@il.ibm.com>, Martin Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com> wrote: > https://www.w3.org/International/wiki/IRIStatus Looking through this, the URL Standard addresses the IDNA issues you mention. It does not address how mailto is to be processed however, but this could be build on top of what the URL Standard has today. The bidirectional section has a good point in that even if we give some advice towards displaying URLs (including converting their internal percent-encoded bytes to Unicode) doing anything more than left-to-right string is tricky and it might indeed be confusing if browser UI displayed these differently from plain text. (This further argues for only showing domains in the browser UI, I think, to avoid making the path look like part of the domain.) I'm not sure URL detection within a string of text is a worthwhile standardization topic, but I suppose we could mention it and some of its pitfalls. It seems though that determining whether n:m is a URL or a relationship in a diagram is rather hard. It's not clear why "Query encoding" is a subsection of "Link detection" or why it's considered to be an open issue. The URL Standard addresses it. As for "Confusable characters" I think this is largely up to implementations. I did add a section detailing some of the issues here: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#security-considerations -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2015 17:57:59 UTC