IDN with Gemini?

C?me's reply here asserts that a client would never need to parse
IRIs, and so there's no added complexity. Just copy the IRI from the
link line, do DNS, and send the IRI to the server. But this is not
true, a client would need to do parsing.

What parsing would a client have to do?

- Extracting the domain, so it can be punycoded for DNS lookups
- Resolving relative IRIs would require parsing the current IRI,
   and the provided one, and combining them. You cannot just copy it
   to make the request.
- When receiving an input status code on a page that already has a
   query string, the IRI has to be parsed to detect that there is a
   query string, and then remove and replace it with the new input of
   the user.
- Extracting the path to get a name for downloading files
- Etc.

There are many reasons why a client would need to be able to parse an
IRI, the relative link one and DNS one being the most important.

This would then require IRI parsing libraries, and as I have explained
earlier, these don't exist in likely many programming languages, and
when they do, they are third-party.

For this reason, as well as the previously stated reason of this being
a large breaking change, I can't support a switch to IRIs.

IDNs, on the other hand... :)

Cheers,
makeworld

---

Previous in thread (39 of 68): 🗣️ Côme Chilliet (come (a) chilliet.eu)

Next in thread (41 of 68): 🗣️ Adnan Maolood (me (a) adnano.co)

View entire thread.