IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: <draft-holsten-about-uri-scheme-06.txt> (The 'about' URI scheme) to Proposed Standard

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Fri, 17 June 2011 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865FC11E81F2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 09:14:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.394
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.394 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.795, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9EkbPAWyHFWd for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 09:14:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8B4A311E81F0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 09:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2011 16:14:28 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp026) with SMTP; 17 Jun 2011 18:14:28 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+94xo6kz+9s1fIr6FkyZ/IN10mmrUfH+kNK0R3Ad hOb0DB8tbBszeP
Message-ID: <4DFB7D62.5060804@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 18:14:26 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-holsten-about-uri-scheme-06.txt> (The 'about' URI scheme) to Proposed Standard
References: <4D3A64FF.1020000@mit.edu> <4DF87637.2000301@gmail.com> <4DF8D6C6.5080005@mit.edu> <4DF9C5EE.9010703@lachy.id.au> <4DFAD1F6.70203@gmail.com> <4DFAD8CD.2030402@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <4DFAD8CD.2030402@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:14:30 -0000

On 2011-06-17 06:32, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> ...
>>>> and because the
>>>> normalization is not defined in the spec.
>> Normalization is defined in RFC 3986.
>
> Browsers don't actually implement RFC 3986 in practice because it's not
> compatible with web content, last I checked.... Pretending like they do
> doesn't seem to be productive.
> ...

It would be very helpful for the IRI WG if browser vendors actually 
reported what this incompatibility is; and whether UAs indeed agree on 
what the "right" thing to do is.

So far I'm aware of certain kinds of preprocessing, and workarounds for 
specific schemes like "data" and "file", but that's it...

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email