RE: [xri] Very short summary of I18N and URIs (IRI)

["Wachob, Gabe" <gwachob@visa.com>]

Nat-
	Thanks for this rundown. Very helpful! I'm sure we'll have more
questions moving forward.

	-Gabe

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sakimura, Nat [mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 5:21 PM
> To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [xri] Very short summary of I18N and URIs (IRI)
> 
> 
> What is IRI?
> ===========
> IRI is the internationalization/internationalisation (I18N) of URI. 
> To I18Nize the URI, much of the characters constraint was 
> removed from URI. 
> IRI is meant to be human readable/pronounceable. Thus, its 
> primary format is
> not an escaped form but in full native characters form. 
> 
> What is special about IRI?
> ========================
> Unlike XML related requirements, in which internationalized 
> URI is to be
> expressed always in UTF-8 or its escaped form regardless of 
> the context
> (e.g., document that embeds the URI), IRI recommends the IRI 
> to be used in
> the same character set as in the underlying context. Thus, in a EUC-JP
> encoded document, IRI should be expressed in EUC-JP also so 
> that the IRI can
> be read as Japanese text in the document. 
> This means that the translation mechanism between these 
> charset and UTF-8
> must be defined. This is pretty straight forward as long as 
> we remain in the
> digital arena. However, translating the printed IRI to UTF-8 
> standard form
> is not trivial because there can be multiple ways to 
> represent the same
> looking character in UTF-8. (e.g., 'e' with accent and 'e-acuter'
> character). Thus, IRI recommends to put some restriction on this
> translation, but not fully. My feeling is that it probably is 
> going to be
> left for each language sub-RFCs or something like that. (The 
> restriction in
> case of Japanese is pretty well defined in IRI document, however. It
> probably reflects the length and knowledge accumulated in Japanese
> information processing - we have been living with this 
> problem for a long
> time now.) 
> RTL (Right to left) and LTR (left to right) scripting issue 
> and mixing of
> those scripts are discussed and seems that it only deals with 
> only one level
> of embedding (which then Unicode algorithm can deal with.) 
> No mention of TTDRTL (Top To Down Right to Left) and TTDLTR 
> (the same with
> left to right) and other scripting directions. 
> 
> Relationship to URI
> ================
> XRI to URI translation (escaping) is defined, so underlying 
> existing system
> can resort to URI. 
> However, the translation must happen as late as possible to 
> avoid double
> translation. 
> 
> Relevance to XRI
> ================
> Human readable form of XRI definitely needs to consider 
> something similar to
> IRI. The reserved characters may become slightly different 
> from IRI. We
> probably need to state those explicitly. Otherwise, we may be able to
> utilize much of the IRI knowledge in XRI specification. 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wachob, Gabe [mailto:gwachob@visa.com] 
> > Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 1:52 AM
> > To: Sakimura, Nat
> > Subject: RE: [xri] Internationalization of URIs
> > 
> > 
> > Nat-
> > 	I was hoping you would say that! THANKS!
> > 
> > 	-Gabe
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sakimura, Nat [mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 6:38 PM
> > > To: 'Wachob, Gabe'
> > > Subject: RE: [xri] Internationalization of URIs
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I am going to look into them.
> > > 
> > > Nat Sakimura
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Wachob, Gabe [mailto:gwachob@visa.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 9:06 AM
> > > > To: 'xri@lists.oasis-open.org'
> > > > Subject: [xri] Internationalization of URIs
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Could someone who has more background on internationalization
> > > > issues take a
> > > > look at the IRI proposal draft at
> > > > http://www.w3.org/International/iri-edit/draft-duerst-iri.html
> > > >  and summarize
> > > > the state of i18n and URIs? 
> > > > 
> > > > I've read the document, looks pretty understandable to me,
> > > > but I'm not sure
> > > > how well it covers the i18n issues we may be facing. 
> > > > 
> > > > Also, do we have adequate coverage of i18n in the requirements?
> > > > 
> > > > 	-Gabe
> > > > 
> > > > P.S. Still waiting for someone to speak up about "secure 
> > resolution" 
> > > > definition & requirements if there is interest.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
>