- From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 12:34:59 +0300
- To: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Cc: Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com>, Jean-Claude Dufourd <jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, public-pkg-uri-scheme <public-pkg-uri-scheme@w3.org>
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> wrote:
> Just to be clear... The expectation you're talking about is that:
>
> 1. upon dereferencing, the query part is ignored
I'm not specifically making this request, I believe in our unminuted
discussion we talked about the potential to allow a script to handle
mappings between URL and Resource. (Also note that HTML5 has at times
talked about this sort of thing for Offline Apps.)
In such a system, 1 wouldn't apply. However, yes, ignoring such a
feature (or similar), the query part should be ignored.
> 2. when present, it's propagated into window.location.query
>
> Correct?
it isn't just query that wants behavior, it's more the "way" that
query is supposed to be filled (and certainly is for gecko) is that
the object be a URL as opposed to simply a URI.
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/base/public/nsIURL.idl
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/base/public/nsIURI.idl
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/base/src/nsStandardURL.cpp
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/base/src/nsSimpleURI.cpp
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt
The URI syntax is dependent upon the scheme. In general, absolute
URI are written as follows:
<scheme>:<scheme-specific-part>
^ Simple (data:, telnet:,)
v Generic (http:, hypothetical widget:)
This
"generic URI" syntax consists of a sequence of four main components:
<scheme>://<authority><path>?<query>
>From an implementation perspective, a hypothetical widget: needs to
fall into nsStandardURL instead of nsSimpleURI, path must behave,
query must behave, fragment should behave. In general host and other
fields should also behave, as having them throw exceptions just to
break applications doesn't seem helpful.
To everyone else who wasn't involved in my discussion w/ tlr, I'm
sorry, but the above is I believe one of the many items we discussed.
Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2009 09:35:36 UTC