Forwarded message 1
There's a fascinating thread going on on the public-iri mailing list, starting here:
http://www.w3.org/mid/4FE367DA.7070307@stpeter.im
In a nutshell, a number of folks on the IETF side are asking very good questions about the future of IRIs as identifiers and protocol elements, and what sense these make at all.
The background for that conversation is an IETF IRI Working Group that has been struggling for the past several years, and the fact that the "URL" specification (i.e., how to parse something URI-like in HTML) is now firmly at W3C:
http://www.w3.org/TR/url/
>From yesterday's W3C/IETF liaison call, it sounds like this discussion will pick up further at the upcoming IETF meeting in Vancouver; some folks in the IETF are at a point where they're advocating to consider IRIs a "failed experiment".
Regards,
--
Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org> (@roessler)
--
Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]