- From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 07:08:31 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > Re: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/23-minutes#item08 > > HTML5 does define what a valid URL is versus how it should be parsed by > user agents. Also, a valid URL is either a "valid" URI reference or > "valid" IRI reference. Specifically, valid URL does not allow more > productions than RFC3986 and RFC3987 do. > > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/infrastructure.html#valid-url > has the details. Weird. The spec says "The term "URL" in this specification is used in a manner distinct from the precise technical meaning it is given in RFC 3986. Readers familiar with that RFC will find it easier to read this specification if they pretend the term "URL" as used herein is really called something else altogether." That really is *very* confusing, and needlessly conflicting. URLs are already well-defined in RFC 3986. Can we please define a new term for what the HTML 5 spec is describing and use URL in the sense authoritatively defined by RFC 3986? Perhaps "embedded URL" (EURL or ERL) might make sense? or URL holder? I don't have a really good suggestion, but I can't help but see this redefinition as confusing. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu Refactoring HTML Just Published! http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0321503635/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA
Received on Saturday, 11 October 2008 14:09:06 UTC