- From: Peter Kasting <pkasting@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 11:03:34 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Peter Kasting <pkasting@google.com> wrote: > > Given how unlikely it is that someone will have registered a scheme > handler > > for the one-character drive letters, the Chrome/IE behavior seems more > > forgiving and more likely what the author wants, to me. > > But it also forks the semantics of generic URLs, or at least when the > base URL happens to be a file URL. Those kind of exceptions are not > exactly ideal. In particular treating an absolute URL as a relative > URL under certain circumstances seems bad. I don't see this as a security risk, and if the behavior is desirable, it seems fairly well-scoped in terms of specifying it. PK
Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2013 18:04:00 UTC