- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 15:58:41 -0500
- To: Brian Kelly <B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk>
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
Brian, Le 23 janv. 2004, à 11:25, Brian Kelly a écrit : > I suspect this isn't what you are saying, though. > > Would the comments you made be addressed by including in the QA Tips a > statement along the lines > > "You should be aware that URIs which are memorable in the native > language may be meaningless or misleading in other languages. You may > need to give thoughts to such issues, especially if your resource is > intended for an international audience." Definitely, and your article might be an interesting reference as well. As we should warn why by architecture, URLs are opaque. I think we are approaching a resolution between explicitly showing: - usability advantages and issues - internationalization - architecture reasons I was one of the person before working at W3C who was against dated URIs very strongly. I have a more balanced view right now, balanced between the reality of implementations and ease of use of softwares, and the human behaviour. pronouncable URIs have their management issues too, specifically in the context of "URIs don't change." Thanks Brian, That's great. -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Friday, 23 January 2004 15:58:39 UTC