W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2009

Re: ACTION-103, was: Registering the about: URI scheme

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 14:56:41 +0200
Message-ID: <4A042C09.4070903@gmx.de>
To: Joseph A Holsten <joseph@josephholsten.com>
CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Julian Reschke wrote:
> Joseph A Holsten wrote:
>> A new draft should be published very soon. Once that's up, I intend to 
>> discuss registration on uri-review. I've still got a few outstanding 
>> questions about handling unknown about URIs, whether the reference to 
>> HTML5 should be normative, and the appropriate origin policy for about 
>> URIs besides about:blank. Just minor issues.
>>
>> If you'd like to see the changes so far, see 
>> http://github.com/josephholsten/about-uri-scheme/commits/master/
> 
> Joseph, any news on this?
> 
> Best regards, Julian

It seems we are not making progress on this anymore. Which is very 
unfortunate, because if we don't, we'll have to resolve ISSUE-54 
(<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/54>) differently.

So...

1) Joseph, any news on the new draft? In case you tried submitting it 
and failed, please follow up with me and/or the IETF secretariat.

2) I'm still concerned by the normative reference to HTML5 in the 
version dated April 3 
(<http://github.com/josephholsten/about-uri-scheme/blob/ba79c142e456c66c39782d60af05430fbf0c201f/draft-holsten-about-uri-scheme.txt>):

>    The HTML representation of the URI about:blank MUST use the origin
>    and the effective script origin as defined by HTML5 Section 5.4
>    Origin [W3C.WD-html5]. The origin of the about:blank Document is set
>    when the Document is created. If the new browsing context has a
>    creator browsing context, then the origin of the about:blank Document
>    is the origin of the creator Document. Otherwise, the origin of the
>    about:blank Document is a globally unique identifier assigned when
>    the new browsing context is created.

In order to avoid a circular normative reference between two specs by 
two different SDOs, I'd propose to move that requirement into the HTML5 
spec instead.

BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 8 May 2009 12:57:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:34 GMT