IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] [Uri-review] ws: and wss: schemes

Kristof Zelechovski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl> Fri, 04 September 2009 20:05 UTC

Return-Path: <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1CAF3A6833; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 13:05:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.685
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.685 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.215, BAYES_40=-0.185, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MP3HWxaQh7Jl; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 13:05:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shark.2a.pl (shark.2a.pl [195.117.102.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E34D03A67ED; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 13:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from av.2a.pl (av.2a.pl [195.117.102.9]) by shark.2a.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4391B2A6A8A; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 22:05:47 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at 2a.pl
Received: from shark.2a.pl ([195.117.102.3]) by av.2a.pl (av.2a.pl [195.117.102.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VcO3mAotrF9g; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 22:05:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from POCZTOWIEC (unknown [10.8.1.26]) by shark.2a.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPA id D417D2A6A74; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 22:05:40 +0200 (CEST)
From: Kristof Zelechovski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
To: 'Ian Hickson' <ian@hixie.ch>, 'URI' <uri@w3.org>, hybi@ietf.org, uri-review@ietf.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org
References: <OF22CD1320.96C55266-ON85257610.004AB599-85257610.004BC9CA@lotus.com><C9931C12-E123-437D-8E7D-F8C680C62397@mnot.net><4A8CAA72.3000209@berkeley.edu><Pine.LNX.4.62.0909040147300.6775@hixie.dreamhostps.com><4AA14792.4020009@gmx.de><4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA01AD6282C2@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0909041947250.26930@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:05:54 +0200
Message-ID: <B7F41174BCDB4AA2B5C464C9473F0DAF@POCZTOWIEC>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0909041947250.26930@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
Thread-Index: AcotmWKKm98qA5/eRnO5F1J5wpdUzgAAIjug
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
Subject: Re: [hybi] [Uri-review] ws: and wss: schemes
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 20:05:27 -0000

URI restrictions are not an anachronism.  Imagine an Englishman with no
knowledge of Japanese and no pocket translator to access a resource under a
Japanese IRI that he has printed on paper.  Good luck with that.
Best regards,
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: uri-review-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:uri-review-bounces@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Ian Hickson
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 9:55 PM
To: URI; hybi@ietf.org; uri-review@ietf.org; public-i18n-core@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] [hybi] ws: and wss: schemes

> I've found that confusion tends to surround when an IRI is 
> happily being an IRI and when it needs to be mapped down to a URI.

I'm still confused as to why we still have URIs at all. They're such an 
anachronism.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email