- From: Olav Junker Kjær <olav@olav.dk>
- Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:22:24 +0100
Ian Hickson wrote: > Well, the definition in the spec does what any submission system needs to > do -- it gives the data to the target. Yes, that was the part I didn't understand :-) The spec just describes how escape and embed the dataset in the URI, and then it says: "Then, access the resulting URI". But what does it mean to access a data URI? > I'd rather not leave things undefined, because at the end of the day > people will just come and ask me what they should implement anyway, and > then I'll have to come up with something which will end up implemented but > not specified anywhere. You are right, undefined is a bad idea. However, by describing specific rules for how to handle data-URI, the spec gives the impression that this scheme is somehow a useful feature. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the data-scheme is not really useful as an action target, and that its only described in the spec for completeness? In that case, there are many other schemes <http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes> that authors could theoretically use in an action-attribute. Maybe the spec could just say that the form throws a URI_SCHEME_NOT_SUPPORTED exception when an unsupported scheme is used. Olav Junker Kj?r
Received on Saturday, 15 January 2005 09:22:24 UTC