- From: Andreas Tolfsen <ato@mozilla.com>
- Date: Mon, 09 May 2016 19:45:47 +0100
- To: public-browser-tools-testing@w3.org
On Mon, 9 May 2016, at 18:19, Sam Uong wrote: > Small correction here: ChromeDriver doesn't pass malformed URLs through > the omnibox. Mea culpa. I was probably thinking about some other browser. This is good news, however, and strengthens the argument that a URL string must be a valid URL for navigation to succeed! > Passing an invalid URL to the Get command results in an error. > Relative URLs are also considered to be invalid. Browsing to about:blank > and chrome://settings does work, although javascript: URLs won't. The "javascript" scheme is mentioned in the URL spec, but not "chrome". I’d say that it’s fine for Chrome to support chrome://. Other browsers may not support, say ftp:// in the future. > I don't think a full simulation of the omnibox/address bar belongs in > WebDriver, and implementing it might cause confusion and interop issues > (for certain inputs, some browsers would trigger a search while others > would perform a navigation). Furthermore, development browsers or “browser shells”, such as Servo and Chrome’s content shell, may not have all the necessary features to handle malformed URLs. > I'd be fine with adding a new error status > code for this, if others think it would be useful. I think it’s better than the generic “WebDriverException” that is being used now. Error classification by type can be useful in this context.
Received on Monday, 9 May 2016 18:46:17 UTC