Re: IDNs in IE and Google
"Martin v. Löwis" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.idn |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Michel Suignard wrote: > Concerning IRI, it is not a matter of 'preference'. If you present > something like a URI containing a host name presented in non ASCII > repertoire, you are in fact using an illegal URI per RFC2396 definition. While this is true, it only imposes constraints on the HTML authors - not on the Web browser. In particular, B.2.1 of HTML 4.01 explains that Web browsers should expect authors to violate the constraint, and gives a suggestion on how to deal with this violation. This suggestion clearly predates IDNA, so dealing with this violation using IDNA for the host name part is more sensible. It is (unfortunately) quite common that HTML authors do not follow the relevent HTML recommmendations. Some authors even believe that unlimited extensibility is one of the guiding principles of HTML. In fact, MSIE 6 does process URLs with non-ASCII characters - even though not in the suggested way (but instead, apparently by sending UTF-8 directly to the wire). Changing it to perform IDNA on the host part (and leaving everything else as-is) would not make it less standards-conforming, and give users added value. Regards, Martin