+1 on PaceIRI I'm a little hesitant on this because I'm not familiar with the issues, but it's something we'll probably all have to broach sometime soon. Martin seems to know what he's talking about ;-)
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:54:51 +0100, Julian Reschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Martin Duerst wrote: > > ... > > Bjoern was making a vaild, but fine, point: Because we decided to > > refer to RFC2396bis, rather than to RFC2396, we already have bought > > into the fact that RFC2396bis allows percent-encoded domain names, > > and thus essentially requires IDN support. (apart from the basic > > fact that no resolver is required to resolve all URIs or IRIs) > > ... > > OK, thanks for making me aware of this subtle change. > > > ... > > Regards, Julian > > -- > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 > > -- http://dannyayers.com
