RE: How browsers display IRI's with mixed encodings

> 
> > But I snipped that you said that %FC should be in wide use. And if
> > that is the case, then there could be a lot of legacy content out
> > there which Firefox is motivated to give a fake character display for, no?
> > But how commonly are -or where- e.g. %FC used to point to a
> > "ü-resource"? Not often, I think. Non-ascii is avoided, even today.
> 
> It's definitely first and foremost ASCII only. After that, I don't have any statistics.
> Maybe somebody from Google has some?
> 

For static links to static resources, sure. But REST (for example) has been with us for a while. Non-ASCII is avoidable in a static resource world, which is no longer the most common kind of resource on the Web.

Addison

Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 06:05:28 UTC