Three possible uses for IRIs

[John Cowan]

(Starting a separate thread for this)

I think there are three possible places where IRIs could possibly appear in
Gemini:

1) In client inputs (the address bar or CLI analogue) and outputs
(revealing a link)

2) In the Gemini protocol

3) In text/gemini link lines

I think it's important to disentangle these three cases.  Case 1 just
affects individual clients and can be left up to them, except that there is
some best-practice advice about when *nоt* to display an IRI, specifically
when there are cross-script confusables involved.  For example,
"gemini://gemini.circumlunar.xn--spce-63d/" should not be displayed as
"gemini://gemini.circumlunar.spаce", because that would be deceptive, even
in Gemini: you might be pointed to the Evil Version of the Gemini spec and
not realize it.

I think everyone agrees that Case 2 is a mistake: the protocol elements
should continue to be URIs.

Case 3 is the difficult one.  Should authors be allowed to write
text/gemini links with IRI references? It's not that hard for a client to
convert them to URI references.  No normalization is needed except as part
of punycoding.  However, everyone has to agree on whether this should work
or not; we don't want a user trying to follow a link and sending the Wrong
Thing to the server.

Gemini isn't just supposed to be easy to program for, it's supposed to be
easy to author, too.  Unfortunately these objectives are in conflict here.



John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
Lope de Vega: "It wonders me I can speak at all.  Some caitiff rogue
did rudely yerk me on the knob, wherefrom my wits yet wander."
An Englishman: "Ay, belike a filchman to the nab'll leave you
crank for a spell." --Harry Turtledove, Ruled Britannia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20201207/ed25588c/attachment.htm>