W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > December 2013

Re: reviving the file URI scheme

From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:48:11 +1000
To: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
Cc: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>, uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <CFAA03F269414BF4BD0A1FF86C446FFF@marcosc.com>



On Friday, December 13, 2013 at 12:46 PM, John Cowan wrote:

> Marcos Caceres scripsit:
> >  
> >  
> > On Friday, December 13, 2013 at 12:43 AM, John Cowan wrote:
> >  
> > > It's in his bibliography. But like most (all?) WHATWG products, it is a
> > > reference implementation, not a standard.
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > I think you might be confused: a browser is a reference implementation
> > (in that you can reference it as attempting to implement a standard); a
> > standard is a technical specification that has multiple implementations
> > and is overseen by a standardization authority (in this case, the
> > WHATWG).
>  
>  
>  
> A reference implementation is an implementation that itself constitutes the
> standard; if you want to know what the standard prescribes, you fire up
> the implementation and try it. WHATWG standards are written in code
> (it would be perfectly feasible to write a compiler for it), and that's
> why they are reference implementations.
>  

I don’t understand what you mean by they are written in code?   
Received on Friday, 13 December 2013 02:48:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:16 UTC