- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:32:43 +0200
- To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>
On 29/08/2013 15:58 , Simon Pieters wrote: > On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 15:02:48 +0200, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> > wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Jake Archibald >> <jaffathecake@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Causing a network error in existing browsers is a shame. > > It seems to fail to resolve in IE10. It works in > Gecko/WebKit/Blink/Presto: the %! is requested literally. However, both > Apache and IIS seems to return 400 Bad Request. That's not exactly promising. >> Picking something that could occur in paths seems problematic. > > I'm not sure why it's more problematic than something than could occur > in the fragment. > > For instance, the string "$zip=" is not present at all in > http://webdevdata.org/ data set 18/06/2013. So maybe we could use a > string like that in the path and have a graceful fallback path in legacy > browsers that work in existing servers. That's my preferred approach so far. However I wonder about the precise details. Assuming <img src="/foo.zip/$zip=dahut.png"> I'm guessing that the browser would actually just request "/foo.zip" from the server in the same manner that fragments are stripped, right? Somehow the stripping bothers me a bit; for instance, what would Navigation Controller see? I wonder if we couldn't just use the query part for this: <img src="/foo.zip?!zip/dahut.png">. No stripping is needed (as far as I know servers would normally just serve foo.zip in this case), which simplifies the model. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Friday, 13 September 2013 10:33:22 UTC