W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2012

Re: [whatwg] URL testing

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 10:33:32 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnb78hWkRdExJWVpmTLeGP8_gaYXtKM5mhZwmwwW9RUUkVRzA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Weber <chris@lookout.net>
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Chris Weber <chris@lookout.net> wrote:
> There also appears to be some differences in Unicode normalization
> (assuming I tested this enough), see:
>
> http://web.lookout.net/2012/03/unicode-normalization-in-urls.html
>
> In my tests:
>
> Safari applied NFC normalization to the path, query, and fragment.
> Chrome applied NFC normalization to the fragment only.
> MSIE, Firefox, and Opera did not apply normalization anywhere.

I don't think we should allow normalization (other than for the host
name). Since you are testing fragment, you might want to compare .hash
and .href. The results are different there. I've not yet reached a
conclusion there for what the specification should align with.
(Currently both are percent-escaped, but I could go with neither, or
one or the other I suppose).


>> * IDNA is a rathole.
>
> But it makes for interesting test cases :-)

The problem is that it's not clear what to test (or define in the
specification): http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/URL#IDNA


> I plan to do it slowly over the course of the next week or two.

Cool! Having some kind of infrastructure in place for setting (and
getting I suppose) individual components would also be good to have.
Are you planning on adding that? I'll try to allocate some time to
review the tests in more detail.


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Sunday, 25 November 2012 10:34:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:48:11 GMT