Re: Definition of "visit" (ACTION-303)

Mike,

First off it's a bit political because there's the W3C version of the
document and the WHATWG version of the document, and which is authoritative
depends largely upon whom you ask (even different browsers view different
versions of the document as authoritative). Luckily these definitions seem
to be in both versions of the document and were there from before the
fracture where the W3C version ossified.

Browsing context is defined in Section 5.1 ("Browsing contexts") of the W3C
doc. session history, document, address etc are all linked terms in that
section.

-Ian

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Mike O'Neill
<michael.oneill@baycloud.com>wrote:

> Ian,****
>
> ** **
>
> That sounds fine to me, but I can’t find the definition in the Uri you
> give. What is the paragraph?****
>
> ** **
>
> Mike****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) [mailto:ifette@google.com]
> *Sent:* 24 October 2012 18:52
> *To:* public-tracking@w3.org Group WG
> *Subject:* Definition of "visit" (ACTION-303)****
>
> ** **
>
> A number of places in the document have a notion of "the site a user is
> visiting" (largely in relation to determining whether something is a first
> or third party). I believe it's important for us to have a concrete,
> unambiguous definition of this.****
>
> ** **
>
> What I propose is to use the definition from the HTML spec. (
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/single-page.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=feed#windows
> )****
>
> ** **
>
> A user "visits" a given URI when the user takes action (such as typing
> that URI into an address bar, clicking a link to that URI on another
> website, or clicking a link to that URI from an external program that opens
> a web user agent) that results in a _browsing context_ whose _session
> history_ contains a _Document_ with an _address_ matching the given URI.**
> **
>
> ** **
>
> This is about as concrete and unambiguous as I can make it. By definition,
> this also resolves ACTION-304 in that the user would "visit" any redirects
> that were involved in "visit"ing anything else.****
>

Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2012 18:16:48 UTC