Re: [whatwg/url] Provide a succinct grammar for valid URL strings (#479)

> Not in the IETF's own sense of obsoletion, but it can indeed obsolete the IETF RFCs in the plain English sense of the word:
> 
> > no longer produced or used; out of date.
> > _"the disposal of old and obsolete machinery"_

It technically can but I don't see how it has done this.

- https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/18/docs/api/java.base/java/net/URL.html

   > The syntax of URL is defined by [RFC 2396: Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax](http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt),

   Also no mention of WHATWG.

- https://pkg.go.dev/net/url also has no mention of WHATWG, just IETF RFCs.

- https://docs.python.org/3/library/urllib.parse.html while this does at least mention WHATWG, it references the IETF RFCs significantly more.

- https://www.php.net/manual/en/function.parse-url.php - cites IETF RFCs, does not mention WHATWG.

Your claim may have some basis if we only consider browsers, but I don't just consider browsers, and from what I can see the only real effect of this effort has is that it bifurcated the concept of URL while introducing even further confusion in setting unattainable goals like "Standardize on the term URL. URI and IRI are just confusing." which is not a goal that has been attained and does not seem to be a goal that will be attained.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/url/issues/479#issuecomment-1233309436
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/url/issues/479/1233309436@github.com>