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

Re: [whatwg] [url] Feedback from TPAC

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 09:28:36 -0500
Message-ID: <5458E294.5090903@intertwingly.net>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Cc: WhatWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
On 11/03/2014 10:32 AM, Anne van Kesteren 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 doesn’t obsolete RFC 3986 is attractive.
> Is Apple interested in changing its URL infrastructure to not be
> fundamentally incompatible with RFC 3986 then?
> 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.

I would hope that everybody involved would enter into this discussion 
being willing to give a bit.

To help foster discussion, I've made an alternate version of the live 
URL parser page, one that enables setting of the base URL:


Of course, if there are any bugs in the proposed reference 
implementation, I'm interested in that too.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2014 14:29:02 UTC

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