Message-Id: <3363D3E2.3DA9@parc.xerox.com> Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 15:32:02 PDT From: Larry Masinter <email@example.com> To: Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@sci.wfbr.edu> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com Subject: initial "relative-looking" elements. The enormous flap over internationalization left me with little time to deal with other issues. I don't quite understand where we want to go with some of the other issues. > The rules for resolving partial/relative URLs since the > beginning of URL time have been such that if relative symbolic > elements end up at the beginning of paths they should be retained, > e.g., you can end up with something like: > > http://host/../foo/blah.html > > but Netscape's parsing ends up stripping lead relative symbolic > elements yielding: > > http://host/foo/blah.html > > with the consequence that many people are putting HREFs and SRCs > in their markup which by "valid" parsing rules yield lead > relative symbolic elements, and sending of "false bug reports" > to non-Netscape browser developers with one or another variant > of: > > "It works fine with Netscape." > > I can see retaining the lead relative symbolic elements > in ftp URLs for personal accounts (would generally fail for > anonymous accounts), but to my knowledge no http or https server > would accept such paths, so there's that kind of justification > what Netscape is doing. > > I would appreciate your and others' opinions on whether > it would be good or bad for other browsers to reverse engineer > for that Netscape URL resolving. > > Fote Was there any resolution of this issue?