- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:20:22 -0800
- To: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
- CC: "PUBLIC-IRI@W3.ORG" <PUBLIC-IRI@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
I have updated the proposed draft charter for IRI work in IETF: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/DraftIriCharter to explicitly calls for the resulting document as being suitable as a normative reference from HTML, and points to a draft of HTML Editor Requirements at the end of http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/IriWorkGoals. Please review, accept, or update as necessary, the "HTML Editor Requirements" prior to IETF chartering of the working group next Tuesday Nov 10. Assuming the liaison and requirements are acceptable as part of the IETF IRI working group charter and we find sufficient volunteers for editing, reviewing nad chairing, I offer a (vague, but I think workable) CHANGE PROPOSAL FOR HTML: Based on assuming that those requirements are met: please replace the definition of URL in the HTML5 specification and all descriptions of URL processing in the HTML5 specification with specific references to the [IRIBIS] document. I think this includes sections such as * Determine whether a string best matches Relative or Absolute, e.g., one might say: "Determine whether Absolute or Relative as per [IRIBIS]" * Determine whether a string is or isn't valid an IRI "Determine whether valid as per [IRIBIS]" * Offer heuristics for interpreting a user input or other unvalidated string as an IRI "User agents MAY interpret invalid strings as if they were valid in cases where the input is not otherwise validated, as per [IRIBIS]" * Resolve a relative IRI against a base As far as timing goes: Whenever you have a normative specification to another specification which is, itself, under development, there is some coordination necessary, but this request is based on the assumption that it isn't necessary to wait for the IRIBIS process to complete in order for HTML5 to go to last call prior to its publication as Proposed Recommendation. If there is not an IETF working group to update these documents such that they are suitable for reference by the HTML working group, then an appropriate change proposal would be to put back in the HTML5-only URL parsing algorithm that was there before the [WEBADDRESS] specification was split out. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Thursday, 5 November 2009 20:23:30 UTC