jdev - 2023-09-17

  1. lovetox

    if we add a xmpp address to a website clickable as link, does this need to be in URI or IRI form? or does it only depend on the applications you expect to send this IRI/URI to

  2. lovetox

    ever URI is a valid IRI, so the question is just, if we can spare that one mapping step to URI

  3. lovetox

    further i think i found a error in the spec

  4. lovetox

    IRI spec says "ikey" and "iquerytype" must be iunreserved

  5. lovetox

    but the URI scheme in the same spec defines it as ( unreserved / pct-encoded )

  6. lovetox

    which in my opinion would violate the rule from https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3987#section-3.1

  7. lovetox

    > Every URI is by definition an IRI.

  8. lovetox

    hm it does not exactly violate the rule, but it makes it impossible to convert the URI back to a IRI

  9. lovetox

    > However, the IRI resulting from this conversion may not be exactly the same as the original IRI (if there ever was one).

  10. lovetox


  11. lovetox

    hm no i was confused, it just means iunreserved contains unicodechars, so they have to be percent encoded in the URI form

  12. lovetox

    hm no, % is not in unreserved, it is not allowed as key in a IRI, so a URI which encodes something there is not an IRI anymore and violates the rule

  13. singpolyma

    Yes for clickable links definitely want URI form which implies escaping some stuff

  14. lovetox


  15. lovetox

    > URIs identify resources in various ways. IRIs also identify resources. When the IRI is used solely for identification purposes, it is not necessary to map the IRI to a URI

  16. lovetox

    whatever a identification purpose is, but i would argue you cant do anything with a URI in xmpp, you need to convert it back to a JID. Makes less sense for me to add an additional conversion URI -> IRI -> JID

  17. singpolyma

    How would you make a link that isn't a URI?

  18. lovetox


  19. lovetox

    this is a valid IRI, but not a valid URI

  20. lovetox

    IRI is simply URI without escaping a certain range of unicode chars

  21. Zash

    IRI = Internationalized-URI or so

  22. Zash

    URN, IRI, URI, URL.... not confusing at all! :)

  23. lovetox

    As XMPP supports a wide range of unicode chars in addresses, of course using the IRI form is better, URI is simply ugly in this case

  24. lovetox

    so thats why i was wondering, if you make a link on a homepage, what will the browser do with a xmpp scheme link? it will pass it to a xmpp application defined in the browser

  25. lovetox

    of course a xmpp application can handle a IRI, because its impossible to be able to handle URIs but not IRIs

  26. lovetox

    the only thing i could imagine is the browser doing it self some network operation where the unicode characters in a IRI would not be allowed

  27. lovetox

    but im not aware of any such usecase

  28. Zash

    I imagine the thing to worry about is whether intermediate things handle unicode correctly. These days, I would expect so. Decade ago, maybe less so.

  29. Zash

    I mean things like protocol dispatcher whatever in the OS

  30. singpolyma

    lovetox: oh, you're just asking if it's fine to use iri form? That seems probably fine in most cases

  31. psychhim