[whatwg] Web Addresses vs Legacy Extended IRI

Anne van Kesteren annevk at opera.com
Mon Mar 23 03:03:30 PDT 2009

On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:45:39 +0100, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de>  
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> ...
>> Note that the Web addresses draft isn't specific to HTML5. It is  
>> intended to apply to any user agent that interacts with Web content,  
>> not just Web browsers and HTML. (That's why we took it out of HTML5.)
>> ...
> Be careful; depending on what you call "Web content". For instance, I  
> would consider the Atom feed content (RFC4287) as "Web content", but  
> Atom really uses IRIs, and doesn't need workarounds for broken IRIs in  
> content (as far as I can tell).

Are you sure browser implementations of feeds reject non-IRIs in some way?  
I would expect them to use the same URL handling everywhere.

> Don't leak out workarounds into areas where they aren't needed.

I'm not convinced that having two ways of handling essentially the same  
thing is good.

Anne van Kesteren

More information about the whatwg mailing list