- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 12:34:55 +0200
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: whatWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > Here's my original statement: > > "The expected results are an object that returns the original href, but > empty values for all other properties. I don't see this behavior in the > spec: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-parsing" Yes and as I explained the parsing algorithm either returns a URL or failure. However, we're not directly observing the parsing algorithm, we're using an API of sorts to observe it. The test suite is written around the <a> element as that worked in most UAs. It could easily be adjusted to work for new URL() and such too of course. > If you could be so kind as to point out what I am missing, I would > appreciate it. The way the <a> element works, I assume. Which is mostly how URLUtils works when associated with an object that is not URL. >> Note that RFC 3491 is not a normative dependency for any of the >> algorithms. > > RFC 3491 is a normative dependency for RFC 3490, Internationalizing Domain > Names in Applications (IDNA). > > You said, "per IDNA those are ignored". IDNA does not necessarily mean IDNA2003, though I think they might match for this particular case. When I say IDNA I mean as defined in the URL Standard and its normative dependencies. -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 14 October 2014 10:35:21 UTC