+>> That might well indicate that all major browsers have always supported it so
+>> there is no need to check. I don't see any particular reason why a browser vendor
+>> would not want to accept arbitrary non-whitespace as a valid anchor.
+>>
+>> In practice, minor or old browsers are probably insecure anyway, so I don't care
+>> too much about supporting them perfectly... --s
+
+> After thinking more about this, I don't feel that IRIs are a good
+> solution. Sure, there are machine-readable ways of encoding
+> non-ASCII characters in URLs. But that's not the point here: the
+> point here is to have *human* readable URLs. In the example I give
+> in the plugin documentation, I mention the french word "liberté"
+> which can easily be transliterated to "liberte". By using the
+> RFC3987 scheme, we could use unicode directly in the links (`a
+> href="#liberté"`), but the actual URL would be encoded as
+> `#libert%e9`, which is really not as pretty.
+>
+> I understand you not wanting to introduce another dependency. And I
+> also worry about the transliteration not being stable across
+> releases. After all, it might not even be stable across Unicode
+> releases either! But I'm ready to live with that inconvenience for
+> the user-friendliness of the resulting URLs. --[[anarcat]]
+