URI, according to RFC2396, is already %-escape encoded. If you just want UTF-8 no escaping, then you are either (a) not talking about URI or (b) trying to change URI definition.
Personally, I prefer (a). I would love to see a IRI which is NFC-UTF-8 only without %-escaping. URI can do ToASCII & %-escaping for backward compatibility if they wish. -James Seng ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Oscarsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 4:59 PM Subject: Re: [idn] IRIs ought to use internationalized *host* names > > > > >> Getting back to IRIs and URIs: I propose that conversion of an IRI > >> to URI involve applying ToASCII to each host label. This would allow > >> conversion of any IRI to a URI without changing the syntax of URIs. In > >> contrast, the method proposed in draft-ietf-idn-uri-01 would change the > >> URI syntax. > > > >I like this idea. > > > >If this is done (i.e. IRI goes thru ToASCII for host label), then we > >basically saying for proxy and Host:, you should start from URI not IRI. > > > > All fields should use an URI with all characters encoded using UTF-8. > No ToASCII, no %-encoding. Pure UTF-8. Web servers have to update their > software > so it can handle that instead of updating them to handle ACE and > %-encoded values. > Why make it more complex than needed? > > Dan >
