W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2009

RE: XMLHttpRequest Comments from W3C Forms WG

From: Klotz, Leigh <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:22:32 -0800
Message-ID: <E254B0A7E0268949ABFE5EA97B7D0CF40971733F@USA7061MS01.na.xerox.net>
To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Cc: "WebApps WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Forms WG" <public-forms@w3.org>
Boris,
Thank you for the clarification.  Surely then this ought to be fixed with an IETF or W3C document describing this fact, and not by requiring all future specifications which use URLs to reference the HTML5 document.  

Is it defined in http://www.w3.org/html/wg/href/draft ?

If so, perhaps that document needs to have a better title than "Web Addresses in HTML5" if it's already in use in user agents in practice in web reality?  

Thank you,
Leigh.

-----Original Message-----
From: Boris Zbarsky [mailto:bzbarsky@MIT.EDU] 
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 2:17 PM
To: Klotz, Leigh
Cc: WebApps WG; Forms WG
Subject: Re: XMLHttpRequest Comments from W3C Forms WG

On 12/17/09 2:10 PM, Klotz, Leigh wrote:
> I'd be surprised if some of these aren't terms already defined elsewhere.  "URL" for example, is surely not given a different definition in HTML5 from the definition in RFC 3986.

As it happens, it is.  There are various strings that are defined to not be a URL in RFC 3986 terms (as in, don't match the production) but are used on the web in practice and which handling needs to be defined for.

In other words, RFC 3986 is pretty well divorced from web reality; a UA trying to actually implement it ends up not compatible with the web.

-Boris
Received on Thursday, 17 December 2009 22:23:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:35 GMT