Re: [whatwg] [url] Feedback from TPAC

On Nov 2, 2014, at 20:05 , Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:

> Third, here's a completely different approach to defining URLs that produces the same results (modulo one parse error that Anne agrees[2] should changed in be in the WHATWG spec):
> 
> http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/url.html#url
> 

I rather like this.  The readability is much better (I am not a fan of the current trend of writing specifications in pseudo-basic, which makes life easier for implementers and terrible for anyone else, including authors), and I also think that an approach that doesn’t obsolete RFC 3986 is attractive.


David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Monday, 3 November 2014 15:19:45 UTC