W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: ACTION-337: Review of access element

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 13:47:37 +0200
Cc: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-Id: <18DF8FCE-739C-4456-9155-04A1B6D22566@berjon.com>
To: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Hi Thomas,

On May 2, 2009, at 13:31 , Thomas Roessler wrote:
> 1. What does "access to network resources" mean?  Does this refer to  
> the use of inline resources, stylesheets, images, XMLHttpRequest,  
> form submissions, some of these, all of these?  More precisely, does  
> this apply to (a) causing GET requests (inline resources,  
> stylesheets, ...), (b) reading the results of GET requests (XHR),  
> (c) causing POST requests (forms, XHR)?

It is any access to any resource that requires a network connection,  
irrespective of the type of resource, the operation, etc. I'm  
clarifying.

> 2. The use of "URI" as an attribute name is misleading, since the  
> value of that attribute is actually a pattern.

We're switching to @pattern.

> 3. The formal description of the attribute's value space is defined  
> by reference to the valid URI token (or IRI token) productions in  
> RFCs 3986 and 3987.  Works for me (TM).
>
> Unfortunately, some additional considerations apply for IRI  
> references:  The mapping between arbitrary Unicode character  
> sequences and A-labels ("xn--...") turns out to be sufficiently  
> brittle that the only host name sequences you want to use are U- 
> labels (the subset of non-ASCII labels for which ToUnicode and  
> ToASCII round-trip).  Comparison of IDNs is defined on the level of  
> the A-label ("xn--"), and shouldn't occur on the Unicode level. Take  
> a look at the latest POWDER drafts for another WG that recent  
> grappled with the problem.  Also, be clear what kinds of  
> normalization is applied to the path and query string components  
> before comparison.  How do you deal with % encoding?  (Again, see  
> POWDER -- they're doing the right thing in their latest iteration.)

I take it you're talking about POWDER Grouping? Is there a specific  
section that you think we should find inspiration from (it hurts my  
head a little...)? Would you recommend referencing it outright?

> 4. How do you deal with trailing slashes?

The path component is just a string  it has no structure. If if has a  
trailing slash, then only access to paths that begin with that path  
including its trailing slash is granted.

> 5. What is the use case for the wildcard mechanism?  As I noted  
> before [*], the wildcard mechanism makes it fairly easy to scan  
> large network segments by inventing host names on the fly.  I'd  
> prefer to simply drop that mechanism for the moment and keep things  
> really simple for v1.  If that's not an option, can we please define  
> separate attribute names for patterns that imply access to the  
> entire network and patterns that imply access to resources at a  
> single host name only?

The use case is many services (e.g. Google Maps) that serve from  
unpredictable subdomains, like www17.example.com or  
foo4.bar20.baz32.example.org.

Is your proposal to have a separate attribute like subdomains="true"?  
In some ways I see how it could be clearer, but I don't really see how  
it changes the issue?

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
     Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Received on Thursday, 7 May 2009 11:48:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:31 GMT