[whatwg] hash Attribute

Hello Gervase,

On 11/15/06, Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org> wrote:
>
> Michel Fortin wrote:
> > I'm beginning to think that the link "fingerprint" method is best
> > solution because the hash is more portable as part of the URL. I could
> > for instance copy a fingerprinted URL right into this email:
> >
> >     http://example.com/file#!md5!b3187253c1667fac7d20bb762ad53967
>
> Indeed, that's one of the major use cases.
>
> > and a knowledgeable browser receiving this URL would know how to check
> > the validity of the received document. The two concerns I have with it
> > is that it somewhat distorts the concept of a fragment identifier,
>
> It does a bit; but the fragment identifier is unused for binary
> downloads, so there's not much risk of a clash.



Just an FYI.

I've been promoting the use of fragments for (binary) video file.  (Not
here... but privately and on one public mailing list.)

For example...

http://example.com/video.mpeg#smtpe(01:20:39:15)

Also, I've suggested (privately and on one public mailing list) the use of
fragments on video files for "pointing to" clips.  (I.e., "pointing to"
intervals of the video.)

For example...

http://example.com/video.mpeg#smtpe(01:20:39:15-01:28:14:50)

(Note that there are 2 SMTPE time codes there separated with a hypen.  So it
would be the clip, with in the video, from "01:20:39:15" to "01:28:14:50".)

(This notation was inspired by the "xpointer" fragments.)


See ya

Also, "!" is currently
> not legal in HTML ids, AIUI.
>
> > and
> > it's generally going to be lost if there is any redirection (although a
> > browser that knows about fingerprints could keep them across
> redirections).
>
> Indeed. In fact, it would be a security flaw to update the identifier on
> redirect.
>
> Gerv
>
>


-- 
    Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.

    charles @ reptile.ca
    supercanadian @ gmail.com

    developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20061115/95f854ea/attachment.htm>

Received on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 10:32:07 UTC