- From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 14:58:57 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
I would like to draw the TAG's attention to this requirement in charmod: """ W3C specifications that define protocol or format elements (e.g. HTTP headers, XML attributes, etc.) which are to be interpreted as URI references (or specific subsets of URI references, such as absolute URI references, URIs, etc.) SHOULD use Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRI) [I-D IRI] (or an appropriate subset thereof). """ - http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/#sec-URIs RDF, for example, has recently moved to replace URIs with IRIs (or something like them). I find this seriously problematic since it will break many utilities which have made the assumption that RDF identifiers are ASCII strings with no spaces, etc. I can understand presenting strings this way for user-display and user-entry but storing them this way and making them the official encoding seems to be going too far. I would think that simply using UTF-8 %-encoding would be fine for these purposes. What does the TAG think about changing the standard Web identifier from URIs to IRIs, essentially allowing arbitrary Unicode characters into the body of these identifiers. An example from the RDF test cases shows an HTTP URI with embedded accented characters in Unicode. I'm considering appealing this decision, but I wanted to hear the TAG's position first, Thanks, -- Aaron Swartz [http://www.aaronsw.com/]
Received on Friday, 24 May 2002 15:58:59 UTC