- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 15:43:04 -0400
- To: Scott Berkun <scottber@MICROSOFT.com>
- Cc: pics-interest@w3.org, Laura Tillett <laurati@MICROSOFT.com>, Chris Evans <cevans@MICROSOFT.com>, Julian Jiggins <julianj@MICROSOFT.com>
Thanks for the research, Scott. At 10:47 AM 5/27/98 -0700, Scott Berkun wrote: >Unfortunately it does appear that the Win32 version of IE3 and IE4 requires >an absolute URL. I don't view this as unfortunate at all! I view it as reinforcement that the implementors believed (as do I) that the PICS 1.1 spec as written does not permit relative URLs in 'for'. Since the time I posted the original message we here at MIT have refined our thinking a bit and have come to the tentative conclusion that this small batch of changes should get a new version id; i.e. PICS-1.2. That being the case, one of the original questions is moot -- is there any consistency in behavior when an existing implementation encounters a label with a relative URL? If we go to PICS-1.2 for relative URL support then all existing implementations should ignore labels that use the new feature. (At least, all properly implemented ones :-). Practical implementation question #1 answered. The remaining question is whether there is consensus that the change is a good idea. I'm happy to continue to discuss this on the pics-interest list but if you prefer to give me private feedback that is also acceptable. -Ralph
Received on Wednesday, 27 May 1998 15:43:15 UTC