Re: URLs

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com> wrote:
>> * Parsing does not actually seem to parse the various components. This
>> seems problematic as e.g. http://test::test/ will yield a valid URL
>> while no browser treats it as such. Not that browsers are perfect,
>> e.g. Safari splits http://[::::::::]/ up into components (treating it
>> as a valid URL).
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you're asking here.  It's entirely
> possible that what's in the spec currently is sub-optimal.  I don't
> happen to remember this case specifically.

The specification seems to cover the major parts of URLs, but further
parsing and checking those parts is not done. E.g. checking that a
port is just digits and such. Or that a host actually matches the host
syntax. Or is the idea to just expose those invalid bits in the API
and let some subsystem catch the errors?


> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:06 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:
>> http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/URL#Parsing
>
> That approach generally looks fine, but I haven't reviewed it in detail.

K, thanks. No need to review it in detail now. Need to do a lot of
writing first...


-- 
Anne — Opera Software
http://annevankesteren.nl/
http://www.opera.com/

Received on Monday, 18 June 2012 15:50:22 UTC