I asserted, referring to section 4.2.2 of the XML spec:
>> > "http://somewhere/getgreeting?lang=es&name=C%C3%A9sar";>
>> ]>
>>
>> The name Ce'sar is represented here as C%C3%A9sar in the
>> UTF-8 based escaping, as per the XML requirement.
You replied:
> What the XML spec (and all the others me
Hi Paul,
Except that the "+" in U+ notation already has a URL meaning...
It's also interesting to note that many web servers try to match the
decoded *bytes* to the bytes in the file names on the local file
system. IOW, you're right, the W3C "standard" is haphazardly implemented
and then oft
Hello Mike,
At 19:09 01/04/26 -0600, Mike Brown wrote:
> > W3C specifies to use %-encoded UTF-8 for URLs.
>
>I think that's an overstatement.
>Neither the W3C nor the IETF make such a specification.
True. Neither W3C nor IETF make such a general statement,
because we can't just remove the about
At 15:02 01/04/26 -0700, Paul Deuter wrote:
>Based on the responses, I guess my original question/problem was not
>very well written.
>The %XX idea does not work because this it already in use by lots of
>software
>to encode many different character sets. So again we need something that
>identif
Hello Paul,
At 19:41 01/04/25 -0700, Paul Deuter wrote:
>I am struggling to figure out the correct method for encoding Unicode
>characters in the
>query string portion of a URL.
>
>There is a W3C spec that says the Unicode character should be converted to
>UTF-8 and
>then each byte should be enco
At 11:28 01/04/26 -0700, Markus Scherer wrote:
>Paul Deuter wrote:
> > I am wondering if there isn't a need for the Unicode Spec to also
> > dictate a way of encoding Unicode in an ASCII stream. Perhaps
>
>How many more ways to we need?
>
>To be 8-bit-friendly, we have UTF-8.
>To get everything i
> W3C specifies to use %-encoded UTF-8 for URLs.
I think that's an overstatement.
Neither the W3C nor the IETF make such a specification.
http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/#sec-URIs
contains many ambiguities, conflicts with XML and HTTP,
and is not yet a recommendation.
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2
8 you can use UTF-8 URLs otherwise they are
invalid.
Carl
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Paul Deuter
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 3:02 PM
To: 'Markus Scherer'; unicode
Subject: RE: Unicode in a URL
Based on the responses, I gu
26, 2001 11:29 AM
To: unicode
Subject: Re: Unicode in a URL
Paul Deuter wrote:
> I am wondering if there isn't a need for the Unicode Spec to also
> dictate a way of encoding Unicode in an ASCII stream. Perhaps
How many more ways to we need?
To be 8-bit-friendly, we have UTF-8.
To get ever
Paul Deuter wrote:
> I am wondering if there isn't a need for the Unicode Spec to also
> dictate a way of encoding Unicode in an ASCII stream. Perhaps
How many more ways to we need?
To be 8-bit-friendly, we have UTF-8.
To get everything into ASCII characters, we have UTF-7.
W3C specifies to use
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 09:16:42AM -0700, Paul Deuter wrote:
> I am wondering if there isn't a need for the Unicode Spec to also
> dictate a way of encoding Unicode in an ASCII stream. Perhaps
> the %u is already that and I am just ignorant. Another
> alternative would be to use the U+ f
ternationalization Manager
Plumtree Software
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 9:20 PM
To: Paul Deuter
Cc: Unicode List (E-mail)
Subject: Re: Unicode in a URL
12 matches
Mail list logo
