- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 18:04:16 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- CC: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 2014-10-09 17:46, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: >> Based on these results, I believe that it is very premature to tell >> implementors that the spec is ready to be implemented, as they may very well >> find themselves implementing something that has not yet had wide review, and >> may very well change. > > To be clear, none of what you found is surprising. I ran the same > tests while writing the specification. (Except for some of the > recently added ones which appear to be buggy as I pointed out > elsewhere.) > > There's clearly some variation among user agents for these edge cases, > but at the end of the day they have to converge and that requires an > attempt to implement the URL Standard. Do they really need to converge? I do agree that UAs need to do the same for valid input. I happen to disagree that they absolutely need to do the same thing for broken input. Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 9 October 2014 16:04:48 UTC