W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > pics-interest@w3.org > May 1998

Re: IE update on relative URLs (was RE: Relative URLs in 'for' option of PICS labels)

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 15:43:04 -0400
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980527154304.00cf87e0@127.0.0.1>
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:30:07 GMT