- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 15:18:50 -0700
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: public-iri@w3.org
On May 3, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > On May 3, 2011, at 12:24 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: >> Color me confused. I have never seen actual (non-test) content >> on the Web that has an arbitrary base URI (one that is unusable >> in practice). What is the use case? Is this a javascript idiom >> that I am not familiar with? > > In the test case quoted above, "about:blank" is a real URI that actually gets loaded. It neither arbitrary nor unusable. Yes, I know what happens in the test case. What I don't understand is why you think that case is worth testing. What is the use case? Why would a web page include an iframe that loads "about:blank" (which itself is not interoperable) and then perform a sequence of javascript actions that include a relative reference? I don't have a problem with HTML5 prohibiting the use of certain URI schemes as a base URI, assuming the HTML parsers revert to whatever valid base URI was previously active by context, but I would like to make standards decisions based on real examples. ....Roy
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2011 22:19:13 UTC