- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 10:54:26 -0800
- To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com> wrote: >> - "username" and "password" properties are missing >> - There aren't any provided comparison functions. I.e., there's no way >> to tell if two URL objects reference the same absolute URL, if >> one references a path in the same domain, etc. > > The notion of "the same absolute URL" is a bit slippery. It depends > on how well you understand various URL components (e.g., octal > encodings of IP addesss). We could define something, of course, but > we'd just need to do so carefully. Yeah, it would be useful to have some use cases and examples here to work from. E.g. I suspect we may want to have a method at some point that considers these equal: http://x/?test&test2 http://x/?test2&test even though they would always be considered strictly distinct currently (and some servers reportedly rely on this distinction). > Yes, the http://url.spec.whatwg.org/#urlquery interface lets you get > at parsed URL parameters. I don't think there's currently a way to > turn them into form data objects, but that would make sense. > > We might also want to add a bulk setter that takes a Dictionary. Concrete suggestions for URLQuery are very much welcome. For behavior too. get()/getAll() are clear. set() not so much: "?x&y&x=5&y" set("x","1") what happens? Or with set("x", [1,2])? And set("x", [1,2,3]? Idea: "?x=1&y&y" "?x=1&y&x=2&y" "?x=1&y&x=2&y&x3" So set() replaces values in order, removes parameters for which no values are set, and adds parameters if there are no existing parameters. I think that calls for add() as well, which simply appends a parameter, irrespective of what is there now. Allowing new FormData(URLQuery) makes sense to me. > That's covered in step 1 of > <http://url.spec.whatwg.org/#constructors>. If there's no explicit > base, the URL is resolved relative to about:blank. To me, that seems > better that implicitly using the document's base URL. You can always > supply the document's base URL from document.baseURI if you want. Yeah, that was my thinking too. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2012 19:18:54 UTC