- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 12:17:29 -0400
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
On 04/28/2016 07:52 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote in
<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016Apr/0454.html>:
> > ... [ https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=652991 ] ...
> Ping! I'm going to make this change if no one objects.
I don't understand what change you're planning to make.
Imho there are three options, based on this thread
1. Relative URLs stay relative. If you change the base URL,
we resolve against that new base URL, which may or may
not result in a change in resource depending on whether
it absolutizes to something new or not.
2. Relative URLs are absolutized. If you change the base URL,
nothing happens. Unless it's a fragment URL, in which case
we handle those specially and don't absolutize them so they
stay relative.
3. Relative URLs are absolutized. If you change the base URL,
nothing happens. Unless it's a fragment URL, in which case
instead of absolutizing them, we turn them into a special
relative-fragment function, which stays relative.
Imho options #2 and #3 are silly and weird. I'm happy with #1.
But I have no idea what you're proposing or why.
~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2016 16:18:10 UTC