- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:39:11 +0200
- To: duanyao <duanyao@ustc.edu>
- Cc: David Kendal <me@dpk.io>, "whatwg@whatwg.org" <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 3:32 PM, duanyao <duanyao@ustc.edu> wrote: > So you mean file: protocol is not portable? For absolute file: url, true; > for relative url, almost not true. > > When writing web pages, no one use absolute file: urls in practice, so this > is a non-issue. Neither is portable or part of the web, since you don't allocate resources on someone else their machine that way. (And even in the sense that you mean it, they're not portable due to the different styles of matching, case-insensitive, Unicode normalization, custom variants of Unicode normalization, bytes vs code points, etc.) -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 17 April 2017 13:39:42 UTC