- 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