W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: XDomainRequest Integration with AC

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 09:55:36 -0700
Message-ID: <4884BF88.8010702@sicking.cc>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sunava Dutta <sunavad@windows.microsoft.com>, "annevk@opera.com" <annevk@opera.com>, Sharath Udupa <Sharath.Udupa@microsoft.com>, Zhenbin Xu <Zhenbin.Xu@microsoft.com>, Gideon Cohn <gidco@windows.microsoft.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, IE8 Core AJAX SWAT Team <ieajax@microsoft.com>

Ian Hickson wrote:
>> If so, that doesn't really buy much as far as forwards compatibility 
>> goes. We have to be backwards compatible with what UAs accept, not what 
>> validators accept.
> 
> Right, the parsing behaviour defines what UAs accept, as far as I can 
> tell.
> 
> 
>> However doing something like what Maciej suggests, of stopping the url 
>> parser at the first whitespace character, sounds like it would solve the 
>> forwards compat issue.
> 
> Agreed.

Ok, so we need to make that change to the spec once Anne gets back.

>> However, if the HTML5 algorithm only considers the same URLs valid as 
>> RFC 3986 does, is there a reason not to point directly to RFC 3986 
>> instead? Seems like there is no reason to have more relaxed error 
>> handling here than needed?
> 
> As you said, we have to be backwards compatible with what UAs accept, not 
> what validators (and RFCs) accept.

This doesn't answer the question of what the win is of pointing 
Access-Control to HTML5 rather than to RFC 3986 for the url parsing 
algorithm.

/ Jonas
Received on Monday, 21 July 2008 16:57:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:27 GMT