- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 09:51:01 -0700
- To: Joel Weinberger <jww@chromium.org>
- Cc: Austin William Wright <aaa@bzfx.net>, Devdatta Akhawe <dev.akhawe@gmail.com>, Frederik Braun <fbraun@mozilla.com>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Joel Weinberger <jww@chromium.org> wrote: > FWIW, it would not be difficult for Chrome to switch back to the ni:/// > syntax, so I don't think we should make that a blocker on using it. As per https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webappsec/2015Jan/0200.html and other emails I wrote on the subject I'm opposed to switching back. URLs add a layer of abstraction to the processing model that is not warranted and for which there is no precedent. The precedent worth following here is CSP and HTML's existing approach to syntax within attributes. -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2015 16:51:25 UTC