RE: Non-hierarchical base URLs (was Re: draft-abarth-url-01 uploaded)

It would seem like we could distinguish between "How IRIs (URLs) are parsed" and
"how relative forms are resolved against absolute".

It seems more important to preserve scheme-independent base+relative -> absolute
calculations, but having "parsing" depend on scheme... well, in some ways that's almost
a requirement. if you "understand" the scheme, you should be able to parse it.

Along the way, it would be wonderful if we could get some attention on updating the
"file:" scheme specification, although doing so would likely be out of scope for this working
group, maybe we could get a list of schemes whose definitions should be updated for
internationalization, bidi, etc.

Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: public-iri-request@w3.org [mailto:public-iri-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Boris Zbarsky
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 9:44 AM
To: Adam Barth
Cc: Julian Reschke; public-iri@w3.org
Subject: Re: Non-hierarchical base URLs (was Re: draft-abarth-url-01 uploaded)

On 4/25/11 3:50 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
> I don't believe you can correctly account for the behavior of existing
> browsers without classifying schemes into at least two categories.

In Gecko's case, I believe there are 4 different categories.  We have 
one parsing setup for "non-hierarchical" schemes (view-source, data, 
javascript, about, etc), and 3 different parsing setups for 
"hierarchical" ones (http, ftp, file, chromesee the URLTYPE_* constants 
at 
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/c062731105cf/netwerk/base/public/nsIStandardURL.idl#l53 
which happen to document how the parsing differs based on the different 
type).

-Boris

Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2011 03:46:27 UTC