W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2011

[Bug 12986] New: Last Call comments to HTML5

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 08:06:45 +0000
To: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-12986-2495@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12986

           Summary: Last Call comments to HTML5
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: Other
               URL: http://www.w3.org/mid/4DFC5AC4.7030105@gmail.com
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson)
        AssignedTo: ian@hixie.ch
        ReportedBy: mike+html-wg-mailbot@w3.org
         QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org,
                    public-html@w3.org


public-html-comments posting from: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
http://www.w3.org/mid/4DFC5AC4.7030105@gmail.com

Hello,

Mark Nottingham, who is IETF/W3C liaison, notified folks at the IETF 
that HTML WG started LC on HTML5 specifications.  I'd like to provide 
some comments with regard to URIs in the HTML5 specification.  (This 
message was initially sent to apps-discuss@ietf.org list).  Some 
additions are in-line.

> Hello,
>
> I see the proposed HTML5 specification has the following text (Section 
> 2.6.1):
>
>> This specification defines the URL |about:legacy-compat| as a 
>> reserved, though unresolvable, |about:| URI, for use in DOCTYPE 
>> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#syntax-doctype>s in HTML 
>> documents <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#html-documents> 
>> when needed for compatibility with XML tools. [ABOUT] 
>> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#refsABOUT>
>>
>> This specification defines the URL |about:srcdoc| as a reserved, 
>> though unresolvable, |about:| URI, that is used as the document's 
>> address 
>> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-document-s-address> 
>> of |iframe| |srcdoc| documents 
>> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#an-iframe-srcdoc-document>. 
>> [ABOUT] <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#refsABOUT>
>>
> Moreover, the [ABOUT] references the well-known 
> draft-holsten-about-uri-scheme which we have had a lot of discussions 
> on.  Considering that there isn't a strong decision on this draft, I'd 
> recommend W3C not to include this text in the proposed document.  
> Mentioning that "about:legacy-compat" is to be used for a specific 
> purpose in Section 8.1.1 (the same is with "about:srcdoc") seems fine 
> to me.
Currently, this Internet-Draft is being actively discussed at IETF; we 
haven't reached some stable consensus with regard to it.  See archives 
at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/maillist.html for 
these discussions.
>
> Probably the same is with 'javascript' URIs (Section 6.1.5).  It 
> references [JSURL], the draft-hoehrmann-javascript-scheme, which is 
> now expired.  It includes-by-reference the source code retrieval 
> operation for these URIs 
> (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoehrmann-javascript-scheme-03#section-3.1).  
> I propose not to include it by reference but rather describe in the 
> specification itself.  The algorithm contains only 4 steps so it 
> shouldn't be a problem.
>
> An editorial comment.  I see the document using such terms as "mailto: 
> URL", "data: URL", "javascript: URL" etc.  An example is (Section 2.1.1):
>
>> The term |data:| URL refers to URLs 
>> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#url> that use the |data:| 
>> scheme.
> Considering the string before "URL" identifies the scheme, I'd 
> recommend not to include ":" (colon) their, since this character isn't 
> a part of the scheme name (but rather a delimiter).  Having "scheme 
> URL" or " 'scheme' URL " (I personally prefer the last) is OK.
>
> With regard to references.  The [MAILTO] references the document which 
> was obsoleted by RFC 6068.  [COOKIES] has become RFC 6265 (the link 
> should be fixed).  References to Internet-Drafts should be given as 
> "Work in Progress" per RFC 2026.
>
> Probably Section 2.6, as well as some other URI-related stuff, can be 
> interested for some people on uri@w3.org list so I'll forward the LC 
> announcement there to encourage their feedback.
I've already sent a note to this list.

Mykyta Yevstifeyev
>
> All the best,
> Mykyta Yevstifeyev
>
> 17.06.2011 23:45, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> [ with my IETF/W3C Liaison hat on ]
>>
>> The W3C has announced a Last Call on the HTML5 specification; see:
>>   http://www.w3.org/2011/02/htmlwg-pr.html
>>
>> The IETF has been encouraged to provide feedback, especially regarding HTML's use of and interface with IETF technologies.
>>
>> For background on Last Call in their process, see:
>>   http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#last-call
>>
>> and the specification itself:
>>   http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/
>> paying special attention to the 'status of this document' section for information about the Last Call and how to provide feedback.
>>
>> See also their LC FAQ:
>>   http://www.w3.org/2011/05/html5lc-faq.html
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> --
>> Mark Nottinghamhttp://www.mnot.net/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> apps-discuss mailing list
>> apps-discuss@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>>

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 18 June 2011 08:06:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:25 UTC