- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:15:13 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7806 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|WORKSFORME | --- Comment #7 from Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> 2009-10-20 09:15:13 --- (In reply to comment #6) > > I still do not understand why it says "undereferencable". Is this a normative > > requirement? > > Yes. > > > > If so, for what reason? > > Because if you gave a ereferencable URL, people might be tempted to dereference > it, which would be bad, since it wouldn't point at the article in question. It's not HTML5's job to dictate this. RFC 4287 already is sufficiently clear about this: "Its content MUST be an IRI, as defined by [RFC3987]. Note that the definition of "IRI" excludes relative references. Though the IRI might use a dereferencable scheme, Atom Processors MUST NOT assume it can be dereferenced." -- http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc4287.html#rfc.section.4.2.6 > > "The same <span>absolute URL</span> should be > > generated for each run of this algorithm when given the same > > input." > > > > I think this should be a "must". > > Certain UAs won't be able to guarantee that, e.g. because they store no state > and thus use a hash of the page and the page changes slightly each time the > page is loaded. In which case they must not generate the ID. "When an Atom Document is relocated, migrated, syndicated, republished, exported, or imported, the content of its atom:id element MUST NOT change. Put another way, an atom:id element pertains to all instantiations of a particular Atom entry or feed; revisions retain the same content in their atom:id elements. It is suggested that the atom:id element be stored along with the associated resource." -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 09:15:18 UTC