W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2014

Re: [whatwg] [url] Feedback from TPAC

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 15:41:38 +0000
Message-Id: <7A620DA0-70F5-4439-81CF-A9FF65A7DFDE@apple.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: WhatWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>

On Nov 3, 2014, at 15:32 , Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>> The readability is much better (I am not a fan of the current trend of writing specifications in pseudo-basic, which makes life easier for implementers and terrible for anyone else, including authors), and I also think that an approach that doesnít obsolete RFC 3986 is attractive.
> 
> Is Apple interested in changing its URL infrastructure to not be
> fundamentally incompatible with RFC 3986 then?

I was expressing a personal opinion on readability, and on living in a larger community, not an Apple position.

> 
> Other than slightly different eventual data models for URLs, which we
> could maybe amend RFC 3986 for IETF gods willing, I think the main
> problem is that a URL that goes through an RFC 3986 pipeline cannot go
> through a URL pipeline. E.g. parsing "../test" against
> "foobar://test/x" gives wildly different results. That is not a state
> we want to be in, so something has to give.

Agreed, we have to work out the differences. 


David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Monday, 3 November 2014 15:42:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:32 UTC