- From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 09:42:13 -0700
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "plh@w3.org" <plh@w3.org>, "Peter Saint-Andre (stpeter@stpeter.im)" <stpeter@stpeter.im>, "Pete Resnick (presnick@qualcomm.com)" <presnick@qualcomm.com>, "Martin Dürst (duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp)" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:
>
> At this point we have to look at what status Anne's work could be published
> under. It doesn't have to be a fork, it could simply be published as The One
> True Way to parse URLs (after reviews, etc. obviously). Is that something
> that could be acceptable?
>
The current document at http://url.spec.whatwg.org/
has the following as its stated goal:
"The URL standard sets out to make URLs throughout the web platform
fully predictable and interoperable. This is the plan:
Take the algorithms from RFC 3986 and RFC 3987 and align them with
existing implementations."
This is not the right scope for anything that is the One True Way, at
least in my opinion.
Again, just my personal opinion, with no hats on.
Ted
Received on Monday, 15 October 2012 16:42:40 UTC