W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > July to September 2013

RE: ReSpec and https

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 19:33:22 +0200
To: "'Ian Jacobs'" <ij@w3.org>, "'Tab Atkins Jr.'" <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Tim Bray'" <tbray@textuality.com>, "'Shane McCarron'" <shane@aptest.com>, "'Robin Berjon'" <robin@w3.org>, <spec-prod@w3.org>, "'Dom Hazael-Massieux'" <dom@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001101ce9914$6120ac90$236205b0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 7:20 PM, Ian Jacobs wrote:
> On Aug 14, 2013, at 12:17 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
> >> And anyhow, couldn't you have respec generate relative URIs starting
with
> >> //w3.org/...?  That way they get whichever of http: or https: the
> original page was fetched with.  -T
> >
> > Not if you're doing local edits, and thus viewing it at a file: url,
> > as Robin said.
> 
> That comes back to the point that perhaps in "editor's draft" mode
> respec does one thing, then in "ready to publish" mode it does another.

As Robin already said. We tried a couple of things. All that smartness had
negative side effects (just look at a copy in a Mercurial repo which is by
default https) and using https by default doesn't have any AFAICT. So I
would like to keep https for these two.



--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 14 August 2013 17:33:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:19 UTC