- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 11:06:21 +0100
- To: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
At 18:27 +0900 30/01/09, Michael(tm) Smith wrote: > > > > * The spec doesn't define for authors how relative URLs are resolved. >> > >> > (bug 6505) Is it necessary for it do so? That is, if the purpose of this >> > spec remains constrained to describing what a conformant document is and >> > what the elements and attributes are meant to represent, would it need >> > to describe how relative URLs are resolved? >> >> If the purpose of this draft is constrained to describing what a >> conformant document is, then it needs enough material in there to make >> sure that the reader can check that the document doesn't contain relative >> URLs when the base URL can't be used to resolve URLs. > >OK, I see now. > Asking a naive question: is this actually a conformance question *at the HTML level*? As long as the URL conforms to the syntax requirements of URLs, then shouldn't it be treated as a black box? Unless the situations in which a base URL is unknown can be syntactically described, of course... -- David Singer Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Friday, 30 January 2009 10:08:01 UTC