- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 11:24:54 +0200
Anne van Kesteren schrieb: > On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:43:55 +0200, Julian Reschke > <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote: >> Maciej Stachowiak schrieb: >>> ... >>> Besides the backslash thing, there are a number of URI processing >>> rules that browsers must follow for web compatibility which are >>> either not required by or directly contradictory to the URI RFCs. >>> Documenting these and fixing the relevant RFCs would be a valuable >>> goal, but possibly beyond the scope of WHATWG. >>> ... >> >> Interesting. Details please. In doubt, on the URI mailing list >> (<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/>). > > See this thread from last month for instance: > > > http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-March/thread.html#10088 > ... Thanks for the pointer. It seems to me that at least this thread does not point out bugs in RFC3986 or RFC3987, but problems in user agents that do not follow these specs. Or stated otherwise: in reality, URIs in HTML documents are not RFC-compliant URIs or IRIs, but something else. It's up to the working group to either deprecate these kinds of references, or to specify how they should be handled. In any case, this doesn't seem to be a problem with the URI/IRI RFCs. Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 12 April 2007 02:24:54 UTC