Re: Generic syntax

On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> wrote:
> Cool, do you think it should go in a separate spec or how do you want
> to organize it?

I think we might end up not using URL fragments for this after all.
See the thread on the WHATWG list. They're problematic for supporting
addressing within the zip archive.


> I must ask though, why is it necessary to support non-UTF-8 encodings
> for Zip URLs at all?

Zip resource names are byte sequences, because they didn't bother to
abstract that to strings somehow in time.


> I'll also note that Presto actually supported something like this, but
> I think it was only used internally (for skin files) and the syntax
> was (I think) foo.zip/fileinzip.

We can't really do that. URLs today can look like that and would be fine.


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/

Received on Thursday, 29 August 2013 10:24:34 UTC