W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2009

[whatwg] "C:\fakepath\" in HTML5

From: Nils Dagsson Moskopp <nils-dagsson-moskopp@dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 15:55:51 +0200
Message-ID: <1239458151.4075.76.camel@desudesudesu>
Am Dienstag, den 24.03.2009, 08:18 +0000 schrieb Ian Hickson: 
> > > According to Microsoft:
> > > 
> > >    http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2009/03/20/rtm-platform-changes.aspx
> > > 
> > > ...the problem was with "a significant number of sites (e.g. education
> > > products, several movie sharing sites, etc) and devices (e.g. popular home
> > > routers)". The blog post above includes a screenshot of a firmware upgrade
> > > screen that has this problem. This is not a site that could be fixed.

Designating the router as element of the "trusted zone" (intranet) again
(they reportedly took it out with IE8) should fix that, or shouldn't
it ? I'm not that familiar with MSFT software.

> > > Maybe someone from Opera could let us know which sites caused them to do
> > > this? Was it many, as with Microsoft?

What we apparently do not have here is cold, hard data. As you said on
many other occasions, use cases need to be laid out clearly.

Since this (IMHO extremely confusing) inconsistent change will be
enshrined for generations to come, I am against it - unless the number
of (public !) sites is so big that we can't fix that problem otherwise.

> I followed their lead because I have found that speccing something that is 
> already implemented is more effective than inventing new syntaxes when it 
> comes to getting implementations. In this particular case, it also seems 
> that the "./" syntax wouldn't in fact fix the bugs that were found.

Fixing the buggy web pages would also fix stuff. Why can't this be part
of IE compatibility mode ?

-- 
Nils Dagsson Moskopp
<http://dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
Received on Saturday, 11 April 2009 06:55:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:11 UTC