W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2014

Re: [whatwg] [url] Feedback from TPAC

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 15:50:47 +0000
Message-Id: <4AFEBD31-103F-48D1-A703-F30AB2562633@apple.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: WhatWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>

On Nov 4, 2014, at 15:32 , Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 4:24 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>> at the moment I am more interested in understanding what the best behavior might be than majority voting
> I don't think there is disagreement about what better behavior might
> be in this case, if we skip over the details for the moment.

really?  Safari, Chrome and Opera all return what to me is eminently sensible


Only Firefox and your parser compose ‘banana’ against 'stuff://www.app.com/a/b/' to make ‘banana’.  (I don’t have IE to hand at the moment).

Whether they do this because it’s sensible or because it’s the RFC behavior, I do not know, of course. But being future-resilient (we’ll never be fully future proof, I agree) seems pretty desirable.  Why is ‘banana’ the better answer here?  I assume it fixes some other issue we haven’t explicitly mentioned?

> However,
> how likely is it in your estimation that Apple changes the URL parser
> it ships in this regard?

I have no idea.  I am not in charge of the products we ship :-(, I just try to help the standards landscape include standards we could or would like to support. Clearly I would not yet be advocating for such a change (but I am asking questions in order to learn and tease out the issues, not oppose, right now).

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2014 15:51:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:26 UTC