- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:26:35 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8953 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #10 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2010-02-18 08:26:34 --- (In reply to comment #6) > Here is a test case that I believe expresses Julian's intent: > > <a id="link" href="http://a[b].example.org/">Some link</a> > <pre> > <script> > var link = document.getElementById("link"); > document.writeln(link.protocol); > document.writeln(link.hostname); > document.writeln(link.pathname); > </script> > </pre> That case is already defined. The spec says that it should write three empty strings. See the paragraph starting "On getting, if the input is an absolute URL" and ending "Otherwise, the attribute must return the empty string." in the Interfaces for URL manipulation section. (In reply to comment #8) > > Appreciated; although I don't think this is "new" information. It's new because it gives an actual case, unlike your report, which did not give enough information to determine the validity of the report. (In reply to comment #9) > I think this is a bug in the URL spec by the way. When it says that parsing > fails it should also say what each of the components are. There is no time as far as I am aware where the components are used if parsing fails. If there was such a time, that would be a valid bug. EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: see above - there's no bug here -- 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 Thursday, 18 February 2010 08:26:39 UTC