W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2008

Re: ISSUE-29 (scope-uri-schemes): Should the HTML 5 specification introduce URI schemes such as javascript:? [HTML Principles/Requirements]

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:59:59 -0500
Message-ID: <e9dffd640801230959o1efbb55br5aa8af1aaba870c4@mail.gmail.com>
To: "HTML Issue Tracking WG" <public-html@w3.org>

IMO, it should be provisionally registered as its obviously in very
widespread use, and I have no issues with it being part of HTML 5...
though the registration should follow the template in sec 5.4 of RFC
4395.

This is assuming there's no problem treating the HTML 5 spec as an
IETF contribution per RFC 3978 (see sec 5.2 of RFC 4395).  If that's a
problem then it will have to be with a separate Internet Draft.

Mark.

On 1/23/08, HTML Issue Tracking Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>
> ISSUE-29 (scope-uri-schemes): Should the HTML 5 specification introduce URI schemes such as javascript:? [HTML Principles/Requirements]
>
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/
>
> Raised by: Dan Connolly
> On product: HTML Principles/Requirements
>
> Frank Ellermann writes:
>
> [[
> The draft claiming to be the "5th revision of HTML" introduces
> a javascript: "protocol" for URLs
> ]]
>  -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2008Jan/0010..html
>
> Our charter doesn't mention specification of URI schemes.
> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html
>
> Is this something that can be done in a separate document? or by a different group?
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.         http://www.markbaker.ca
Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2008 18:00:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:29 UTC