I think it makes sense to reference this appendix for URL rewriting. Do we
also stipulate that all markup must be UTF-8 encoded. I thought there were
some reservations on this tactic. I don't think there are any other ways to
assemble multiple charsets into a single page. The idea is that each entity
may be written using a different charset. If this is allowed then the
container will have to convert it into UTF-8 before sending to the client
(browser). The other solution would be to have the container indicate to the
entity which encoding mechanism should be used. This would ensure a single
encoding type across aggregated portlets.
Would simply requiring that portlet entities generate UTF-8 be too limiting?
If so, do we have use cases where this is the case?
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Freedman" <>
To: "WSRP-Markup" <>
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 1:53 PM
Subject: [wsrp-markup] [wsrp][markup] URI encoding.
> Please read the following W3C recommendation:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html40/appendix/notes.html#non-ascii-chars
>
> It distinguishes between the encoding of URIs from the markup in which
> these URIs exist. It recommends that URIs are first encoded using UTF8
> then URI escaped prior to document encoding.
>
> Should we just reference this recommendation?
> -Mike-
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
