- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 21:03:54 +0000
- To: public-houdini-archive@w3.org
Having a *readonly* indicator that it's fragment-only and thus specially treated would be fine with me; I was responding to the idea (possibly misread by me) of a flippable boolean switching it from the special fragment-only behavior to treating it like a normal URL and resolving it against a base. > I'd actually argue that in the type system you'd expose these as two different types so when can explicitly create a URL-fragment-value or a URL-value. > > That way for the URL-value we could also expose normal URL manipulation down the road while not having to special case dealing with it actually being a URL-fragment-value. This seems reasonable to me. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/716#issuecomment-369730053 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 1 March 2018 21:04:00 UTC