Re: [idn] New I-D for Internationalized Resource Identifiers

[tedd <tedd@sperling.com>]

>I have just submitted draft-w3c-i18n-iri-00.txt to the Internet Drafts
>editor. This draft replaces draft-masinter-url-i18n-08.txt. It should be
>published in a few hours/days. In the mean time it is available at
>http://www.w3.org/International/2002/draft-w3c-i18n-iri-00.txt.

Martin.

A comment, you say:

--- Quote:

Under - 3.1 IRI Character Limitations

   c.  The UCS contains many areas of "characters" which have no
          well-established way of inputting them.  These should be
          avoided.  Characters that fall into this category include
          Dingbats, Mathematical and other symbols, ligatures and
          presentation forms.

And under - 4.5 Display of URIs/IRIs

    Software that displays identifiers to users should follow a general
    principle: "Don't display something to a user that the user would not
    be able to enter." The consequences of this principle require
    judgement about the availability of software that implements the
    entry methods described in Section 3.2.

--- Un-quote:

It appears above, and throughout your document, that you are 
suggesting that the limitations of the users computer to set the bar 
with respect to what "characters" (code points) should be allowed. To 
me, that appears myopic.

Clearly, computers are both different and evolving.

What is easy for me to enter via my keyboard may not be easy for you 
depending upon our respective computers. For example, the bullet 
(U-0095, in Dingbats) under a Mac is simply "option 8", while under 
Windoze it is an "ALT 0149" key sequence. Should I be limited in my 
access and use of the net because you selected a computer that 
doesn't perform as well as mine in that area? Likewise, should 
everyone's access to and use of the net be determined by the lowest 
common denominator? If so, then what OS should determine what is the 
"well-established" and acceptable method for inputting characters -- 
the most "popular"?

And for tomorrow, who knows what capabilities computers will offer -- 
should those opportunities be thwarted because of current 
shortcomings?

In my most hubris and uniformed opinion, I see this entire project as 
an opportunity to expand the Internet, not limit it.

Thank you.

tedd

-- 
http://sperling.com