Anonymous user
Talk:Find URI in text: Difference between revisions
m
→Expected Output Needed: devil in the details
m (→Unicode and URIs: - extra word) |
m (→Expected Output Needed: devil in the details) |
||
Line 21:
At this time that would be all of the examples are wrong. --[[User:Dgamey|Dgamey]] 04:37, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
: this is maybe not clear from the task description, handling unicode characters is intentional in order to allow a user to write an url as they see it. (look at how http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Kästner_(camera_designer) is displayed in the browser when you follow the link.)
:: This gets a bit into the details. The link is encoded with ä which is allowed in a URI. If it's Unicode then it is not technically a URI but an IRI (see below). --[[User:Dgamey|Dgamey]] 15:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
:it is not necessary to copy the example input exactly. if you can think of other examples that are worth testing, please include them too.
:as for the expected output, this is a question of the balance beween following the rfc and handling user expectations. for example, a <code> . </code> or <code> , </code> at the end of a URI is most likely not part of the URI according to user expectation, but it is a legal character in the RFC. which rule is better? i don't know. until someone can show a live URI that has <code> . </code> or <code> , </code> at the end i am inclined to remove them. in contrast the <code>()</code> case is somewhat easier to decide. if there is a <code>(</code> before the URI, then clearly the <code>)</code> at the end is also not part of the URI, but there are edge-cases too.--[[User:EMBee|eMBee]] 06:58, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
== Unicode and URIs ==
[http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt RFC 3986] defines URIs and does not allow Unicode; however, the IETF addresses this in [http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt RFC 3987] via the IRI mechanism which is related but separate. The syntactic definitions are very similar where most of the elements are extended. Two lower level elements are added 'iprivate' and 'ucschar' which are specific ranges of two byte percent encoded values. These elements percolate up through most of the higher syntax elements such as the authority, paths, and segments which have i-versions. Other elements such as 'scheme' and the IP address elements are left alone. There is also no 'ireserved' element. --[[User:Dgamey|Dgamey]] 14:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
| |||