W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-iri@w3.org > October 2010

Re: [Uri-review] Updated 'javascript' scheme draft

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 06:17:04 +0200
To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Cc: IRI WG mailing list <public-iri@w3.org>
Message-ID: <dv7la6h7g7gccen9ge5c12kqghurggndud@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Martin J. Dürst wrote:
>[http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-hansen-iri-4395bis-irireg-00.txt]
>[http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-hoehrmann-javascript-scheme-03.txt]

A concern that Julian (and someone else offlist) voiced is that my draft
talks about "resource identifier scheme", defining that by reference to
RFC 3986 and RFC 3987, as there are only "URI schemes". The 4395bis
draft validates my usage, doing the same thing, which I welcome.

My draft does not include the registration template. That has a lead to
some complaints, but my reading of RFC 4395 is that it is not required,
and http://www.w3.org/mid/455CCAAD.2040407@att.com Tony Hansen confirmed
that. The template is not currently used outside the specification when
it is part of an RFC, and in my case it would just be a TOC for the do-
cument; I think it should be clarified that it is not needed in this
case.

Both RFC 4395 and the bis draft attempt to regulate using among other
things "/" in the scheme-specific part. In case of "javascript", it is
common for people to write, say

  javascript:open('http://example.org')

or

  javascript:'example'.match(/../)...

which RFC 4395 says should be avoided. I do not think it's possible to
convince authors to do that, and think the suggestions/requirements
should be reconsidered. Right now my draft says percent-encoding the
slash is encouraged, which also handles `javascript://...` cases where
the first line would be interpreted as comment. There is some remote
utility in that as you can actually get into cases where the javascript
identifier will be used as a "base", but that's evil territory.

That's all that comes to mind. I do hope to submit my draft to the IESG
some time later this month; there have been no notable technical changes
since I published the first draft four years ago.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Tuesday, 5 October 2010 04:24:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 April 2012 19:52:00 GMT