- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 22:41:48 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Christian Schmidt <w3.org@chsc.dk>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Christian Schmidt wrote: > > Christian Schmidt wrote: > > It may be an idea to disallow the URL consisting of the empty string, > > i.e. <img src="">. > > FWIW Firefox now ignores <img src=...> when src is a reference to the > containing document: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=444931 On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > No, it ignores <img src=""> when the base URI for the image node is the > document URI (which isn't quite the same thing as what you said). What Christian said appears to be more accurate: http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%3Cbase%20href%3D%22image%22%3E%3Cimg%20src%3D%22%22%3E I don't understand why we would define things this way though. If the server wants to return different files each time, and return an image once and a document another time and a style sheet a third time, why not? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 29 November 2008 22:42:30 UTC