- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 16:36:16 +0200
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- CC: public-iri@w3.org
On 2011-06-19 16:15, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 6/19/11 10:14 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: >> On 6/18/11 8:06 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >>> A quick one is checking whether there is >>> a special rule for something resembling the "javascript" scheme for the >>> "#" character. >> >> For what it's worth, Gecko's behavior on this particular issue may be >> changing as of Firefox 6 to treat '#' in a javascript: URI as the start >> of a fragment identifier, assuming we don't find compat issues with it. > > Though to be clear, the script text that is executed will continue to > include everything after the 'javascript:', including the fragment > identifier. So the difference may not be detectable. Interesting. Does this mean it will be run through a "more conforming" parser, but then the value will be reconstructed including the fragment identifier? (I ask because that's exactly what I think we need to do *if* we need to have scheme-specific workarounds) Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 19 June 2011 14:36:45 UTC