Re: [whatwg/url] It's not immediately clear that "URL syntax" and "URL parser" conflict (#118)

> The specification is aimed at cURL & co and it's a shame they rather implement no standard at all, but that's up to them

I'm here (representing "cURL & Co" to some degree), discussing in this issue among others, because we find the whatwg "URL standard" to be inferior.

"cURL & co" intend to continue to support URL standards. We've already supported them for a very long time. But as my recent [blog post](https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2016/05/11/my-url-isnt-your-url/) on the subject points out, there is no URL standard. Well, apart from perhaps RFC3986 that browsers don't care much for anyway.

The whatwg "URL standard" has not been developed with proper consideration of the entire ecosystem, sort of in your corner of the world and it is written in a really funny way that makes it really hard to understand what is supported.

Did you really never previously ponder why it is so that only browsers implement all this and that the world of HTTP/URL libraries and command line tool almost unanimously don't?


---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/url/issues/118#issuecomment-218966412