W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2014

Re: Draft [URL] reference update to informative text

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 12:27:05 -0400
Message-ID: <5436B759.80302@intertwingly.net>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
CC: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 10/09/2014 12:12 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>> As a concrete example: as near as I can tell, the following hasn't had wide
>> review, and therefore I suggest that implementers would want to consider
>> carefully before they chose to implement it:
>>
>> http://intertwingly.net/stories/2014/10/05/urltest-results/4b60e32190
>
> It seems you did not test on Windows. Are you suggesting we make URL
> parsing dependent on OS? But yes, around file URLs there's a few small
> things (not this test) that could be done better. The URL Standard has
> open bugs pointing these out.

The IE tests were most definitely done on Windows.  The user agents are 
listed on the page.

I have not made a suggestion, other than to note that in this case the 
"expected results" don't come close to matching any of the results found 
when testing using five browsers across three operating systems.

Overall, I still strongly feel that the URL Standard could benefit from 
a wider review, and to identify what areas are less stable.  And that 
both should be done before making statements like "requires an
attempt to implement the URL Standard."

To be clear: there are areas highlighted in gold, and areas marked in 
green where convergence seems to be happening and that the URL Standard 
captures those.  In nearly all of those cases there still is some 
divergence.  Getting the browser vendors to agree on those would be a 
step forward.

>> I also don't think "all those tests are likely wrong" is a fair conclusion.
>
> Fair. Some appear correct.

I see that you have contributed to these test results in the past.  If 
you know of any specific definitions, it would be helpful if you could 
update them again.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 9 October 2014 16:27:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:57:06 UTC