- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 17:10:12 +0200
- To: Manuel Strehl <svg@manuel-strehl.de>
- CC: uri@w3.org
On 2013-07-18 16:48, Manuel Strehl wrote: > >> data:<h1>%20id=%22FOO%22>ABC</h1>#FOO > > > > No, it's not undefined. But yes, RFC 2397 really needs an update to > > align it with RFC 3986. > > Thanks for the answer. With undefined I mean "this string is not > something, that's defined in RFC 2397". Apart from that, could you point > me to any normative statement about "#" in data URIs? (I've got the > impression from RFC 3986, that "data" in 2397 could be aligned with > "hier-part" in 3986, which'd allow query parts and fragment identifiers, > but I'm not sure, if that's the correct way to read it.) Data URIs are URIs; URI syntax is defined in RFC 3986. RFC 2397 only defines the scheme-specific part; thus it doesn't mention fragment identifiers (and yes, it should, because they way it's written causes confusion). See also <http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2397>. > ... Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 18 July 2013 15:10:40 UTC