W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > May 2002

Re: Comments on charmod from Chris

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 14:22:24 +0200
Message-ID: <97259788109.20020528142224@w3.org>
To: www-tag@w3.org, Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
CC: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
On Tuesday, May 28, 2002, 4:36:07 AM, Martin wrote:

MD> At 13:56 02/05/27 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
>>Chris Lilley wrote:

>>>8 Character Encoding in URI References
>>>Why not go further and say that the IRI form is used in the document 
>>>instance and the hexified URI form when it goes over the wire?
>>
>>Indeed, why not?  -Tim

MD> While indeed currently http is defined to use %hh escaping,
MD> why would there be a need to restrict over the wire to ASCII,
MD> in particular for future protocols? TCP/IP doesn't have any
MD> problems with 8-bit data.

Good point and my comments were indeed restricted to using URIs as
currently defined and http (and similar protocols) as currently
defined.

So lets invent a new protocol called toto: for purposes of discussion,
and make it 8-bit clean and no mention of %hh escaping. So, I can send
binary data across a toto transport. But, doesn't the current
definition of URI still prevent me from sending the niceKanji
version of IRI?.

-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 28 May 2002 08:22:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:51 UTC