# Re: Character set in URL

Milan Sova (sova@feld.cvut.cz)
Wed, 30 Mar 1994 05:40:45 -2587316 (MET DST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Mark P. McCahill: "Re: URL decisions in Seattle, & changes"
- Previous message: IESG Secretary: "Character Sets and other issues of Internationalization"
- In reply to: Tim Berners-Lee: "Character set in URL"

    Message-Id: <9403300340.AA15235@katz.feld.cvut.cz>

    Subject: Re: Character set in URL

    To: uri@bunyip.com

    Date: Wed, 30 Mar 1994 05:40:45 -2587316 (MET DST)

    In-Reply-To: <9403290848.AA00745@ptpc00.cern.ch> from "Tim Berners-Lee" at Mar 29, 94 10:48:13 am

    From: "Milan Sova" <sova@feld.cvut.cz>

>
> So there are there possibilities we have now:
>
> 1. URL is defined to be binary, passed on to underlying
> protocol.
> 2. URL spec is defined to be a specific 8-bit set, Latin-1.
> 3. URL spec is defined to be an 8-bit set defined with each URL.
>
> Milos is right when he says that (2) is presumptuous and broken, but I think
> to go for (3) is to open a can of worms. I think Larry's suggestion is
> correct, but we have to be aware of the fact that if our Danish colleagues
> read Mikos's boss's URL, and their client software assumes Latin-1 encoding
> when displaying it to him,
> then the result will be gibberish. But gibberish which works.
> Which is what URLs are for. Not for looking at.

(1) is OK with me (and my boss).

    --
    					Milan Sova
    					sova@feld.cvut.cz

- Next message: Mark P. McCahill: "Re: URL decisions in Seattle, & changes"
- Previous message: IESG Secretary: "Character Sets and other issues of Internationalization"
- In reply to: Tim Berners-Lee: "Character set in URL"