Re: [whatwg] New URL Standard from Anne van Kesteren on 2012-09-24 (public-whatwg-archive@w3.org from September 2012) from Anne van Kesteren on 2012-10-23 (uri@w3.org from October 2012)

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 11:29:16 +0200
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <CADnb78jUW4Q=q3Nw3n4BMLiq4LWd=+svu3KpxziD7atHS1UmYw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> On 2012-10-23 11:09, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?word1=url&word2=uri
>
> I was referring to "whatever you find in @href" as opposed to "what RFC 3986
> says it is".

Ah okay, well if you have relative URLs and absolute URLs, it makes
sense to call them URLs together.


>> This was about demonstrating that STD 66 is not a suitable interface.
>> (I thought you suggested that. If not, sorry, hopefully it helps
>> someone else.)
>
> OK, so if browsers put /% on the wire *and* servers rely on that, that would
> be an issue. However, I'm not convinced the latter is the case.

I had not really expected otherwise.


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/

Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 09:29:43 UTC