IRI vs. SRI [I18N-ACTION-140]

Previous Topic Next Topic
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view

IRI vs. SRI [I18N-ACTION-140]

Phillips, Addison-2

I'm writing on behalf of the W3C Internationalization Working Group. I was tasked [1] with letting you know that the WG recently [2] reviewed the SRI draft [3] proposal. The working group felt that:

 (1) we think this is an idea in search of a problem. SRI addresses the problem of encoding parts by putting the URI into an XML format. But this format is not consistent with existing markup or interaction practices. It doesn't fix the problem of presenting international characters on the "side of the bus/written on napkin" and it doesn't deal with address bars.
 (2) we don't know what this solves that IRI does not solve
 (3) we continue to support IRI and wish it were done: we believe that, although there are a few nettlesome problems such as with bidi, it is possible to complete this work and move forward




Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect (Lab126)
Chair (W3C I18N WG)

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.