Topic on User talk:Metamorforme42

I saw your comment on the "#" encoding issue. I have the same problem with Svenska Akademins Ordbok-section ID (P9963). I'm however unfamiliar with Phabricator tickets and procedures. Can you tell me what the status of this ticket is and whether a solution is in sight? Can I help the process by adding my observation of this error somewhere, or would I just be contributing noise?

Are there situations when a "#" character does not delimit a fragment identifier but should be encoded with "%23" to prevent a web client from detaching before transmitting the URI to the server? If so, we may have to define a mechanism to tell the difference. I just added a qualifier object has role (P3831)fragment identifier (Q1440450) to the formatter statement, not intended as an actual proposal, but rather as an illustration of the general idea (I iried has part(s) (P527) first but the constraints didn't allow that; ideally I'd like to say "object has part" but there is no such qualifier, so object has role (P3831) will do).

Hi, this issue is open since 2017. Since 2022, it is also part of :phab:T314382 goal, which is still work in progress. However, there is a workaround with https://wikidata-externalid-url.toolforge.org. I added it to P9963, but we still need to wait for the cache to be updated to see the result (about 24h). If you have new elements to bring into the discussion, feel free to add them.

For more details about fragments identifiers, you can refer to https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3986.

Thanks; are we thus supposed to temporarily amend the formatter URL (P1630) and similar properties while we wait for the Phabricator ticket to be resolved? Seems like we should keep the current (old, non-working) format statement for reference pending the resolution then.

Ah, the temporary format is given prefered rank, of course (I just had a look at Larousse Online French Dictionary ID (P11118) to see what you did)! And has quality (P1552) URL redirection (Q1236807) is a good idea. I think I'll add reason for preferred rank (P7452) currently valid value (Q71536244) to indicate that things are supposed to change in the future.

Yes, I'm familiar with the IETF RFC series of documents; it's a true treasure trove of Internet history and lore. RFC 1300: Remembrances of Things Past (Q47463874) is a gem ("Jobs were to look for and Gates were to close"). And even as RFC 4042: UTF-9 and UTF-18 Efficient Transformation Formats of Unicode (Q47470295) was published as an April Fools' Day Request for Comments (Q1322187), it's actually a reasonable thing to implement, if you use the appropriate computer architecture.

I was just browsing RFC 3986 and related editions to try to figure out whether fragment identifier (Q1440450) should be considered part of (P361) a URL or a URI; I didn't find a clear answer since the abbreviation "URL" is essentially absent in more recent editions, replaced by "URI".

Yes, we should keep the old URL as normal rank.

Good idea for the P7452.

Well, URLs are a subclass of URI, and the RFC 3986 states fragment identifier is a part of URI in Appendix A (first line).