- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:30:10 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- CC: "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>
> OK. So your proposal is that if I copy a same-document link from some > document in a browser and paste it into a different browser window it > should just fail, right? I'm not sure I know what you mean by "copy " and "paste" here; copy/paste processing in most windowing systems are based on context-dependent processing and conversion (converting from source format to destination format). Perhaps it would help to elaborate the scenario you're concerned about. You're not talking about "copy" from a "view source" window. Perhaps you're talking about "copy" from the Address bar? In any case, I think "thismessage:/" is only useful in cases where the fragment occurs in a document that has no URI that is useful for accessing the same document without re-retrieval. I'm not certain how clearly that is determinable. Let's take the example of a "same-document" reference inside a document that is entirely inside a data: URI: data:text/html,<html><head></head><body><a%20href="#fragment">Link%20to%20fragment</a><a%20name=fragment>linked%20from%20%earlier</a></body></html> If you copy #fragment or any URL you construct based on it, into another document, then it will fail. It MUST fail -- the content linked to by "#fragment" has no URL, so there is nothing you can copy to paste somewhere else that will function. Right? Do you have a proposed solution which satisfies your requirement? >> Copy/paste of "thismessage:/#fragment" URIs would need to attempt >> to turn "thismessage:/" into the actual URI for the document in the case >> where the document has a URI. >> >> Is this clearer? > Yep. I believe it's unacceptable due to the issue above.
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 04:30:50 UTC