On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 02:51:26PM -0500, Matt Wozniski wrote: > > On Jan 10, 2008 2:39 PM, James Vega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 08:28:14PM +0100, Tony Mechelynck wrote: > > > The parentheses should have been percent-escaped, i.e., replaced by a > > > percent > > > sign and their hex value (00-FF) as in > > > > > > http://www.vim.org/%28test%29 > > > > While it's true that the URL RFC dictates that such characters should be > > hex-escaped, most user interfaces accept the non-escaped version so > > people don't have to remember character codes for everything. This does > > make it more difficult to perform proper highlighting/selection of a URL > > but it's a give and take for user simplicity vs. developer hardship. > > This is also why angle brackets are specified for use as URL delimiters > > in text, since it vastly simplifies parsing. > > Actually, RFC 2616 (Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1) says at > 3.2.3 (URI Comparison) that parentheses, being in the reserved set, > are not required to evaluate as equal to the %XX forms.
I was thinking of RFC 1738 (Uniform Resource Locators) but it also mentions that parentheses are reserved characters and can be escaped unless they're being used for a reserved purpose. James -- GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James Vega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
