HTML requires URIs (Re: IDNAbis compatibility)
mark.davis at icu-project.org
Wed Apr 4 22:13:08 CEST 2007
I'm on vacation this week, but will respond when I get back to work.
I do know that in the test we are handling both the unescaped representation
(å) and the escaped representation (%C3%A5), so we'll have to break the
On 4/4/07, Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no> wrote:
> Mark Davis wrote:
> > On 3/15/07, *John C Klensin* <klensin at jck.com
> > <mailto:klensin at jck.com>> wrote:
> > [snip]
> > I'm trying to understand this experiment. Normally, an href
> > that "uses IDNA" would have Punycode labels (A-labels) in its
> > domain names.
> > I don't know the basis for saying that this would be the "normal"
> > usage. There isn't anything in IDNA2003, unless I'm missing something,
> > that requires or even suggests that it is not perfectly fine to have:
> > <a href="http://ÖBB.at <http://%C3%96BB.at>">Österreichishe
> That text is in the HTML spec.
> All versions of HTML that claim that the stuff inside a "href=" is an
> URI (rather than an IRI) implicitly claim that the domain name is in
> A-label form.
> I'm not up to date on HTML updates, but RFC 3987 was published in
> January 2005, so all versions older than that (including HTML 4.01)
> referenced URIs.
> After a little searching, I found that details on the recommended way of
> handling those errors are in
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/appendix/notes.html#non-ascii-chars> - but
> they're still errors.
> Do you have stats on how many of the 831.000 cases you identified were
> in A-label form rather than "possibly conformant U-label" form? That
> would tell us something about how much standards are adhered to....
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Idna-update