Re: [Uri-review] about: scheme; Simplified Encoding Considerations

Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> Tue, 22 September 2009 03:10 UTC

Return-Path: <masinter@adobe.com>
X-Original-To: uri-review@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uri-review@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46AC3A67D9 for <uri-review@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:10:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cLFs6X5maFq4 for <uri-review@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:10:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod6og104.obsmtp.com (exprod6og104.obsmtp.com [64.18.1.187]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8CF03A67F1 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:10:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([192.150.8.22]) by exprod6ob104.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSrhAYTuNymTeLP2UJgMNssAe1EEyYAtv@postini.com; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:11:32 PDT
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id n8M3BQX3016450; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nahub01.corp.adobe.com (nahub01.corp.adobe.com [10.8.189.97]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id n8M3BQiq025180; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:11:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from excas03.corp.adobe.com (10.8.189.123) by nahub01.corp.adobe.com (10.8.189.97) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.375.2; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:11:26 -0700
Received: from nambx04.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.127.98]) by excas03.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.123]) with mapi; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:11:25 -0700
From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
To: Joseph A Holsten <joseph@josephholsten.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:11:24 -0700
Thread-Topic: about: scheme; Simplified Encoding Considerations
Thread-Index: Aco6vB5ARga44/fMSQuwDMIZnTbKkwAdQoGw
Message-ID: <8B62A039C620904E92F1233570534C9B0118DBB47813@nambx04.corp.adobe.com>
References: <9E1BA1C0-F936-4202-885C-CA26FA86DF60@josephholsten.com>
In-Reply-To: <9E1BA1C0-F936-4202-885C-CA26FA86DF60@josephholsten.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "uri-review@ietf.org" <uri-review@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] about: scheme; Simplified Encoding Considerations
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review>
List-Post: <mailto:uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 03:10:32 -0000

I'm really confused; I'm listed in the acknowlegements 
but I don't think I saw this before? Maybe there was some 
discussion of these points?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/About:_URI_scheme

has a lot more useful information; you know, a 
shorter document that just referenced the Wikipedia
page would seem like it would be a lot more useful.

about:<anything>

where <anything> can be any sequence of characters,
where some common uses are listed in ....



Are there any real use cases for about:
where any of the text about encoding considerations
and equivalence matters? Or that use query parameters?

There are no examples of such in the document.

" Applications are also permitted to redirect such URIs."
This is confusing, because applications are permitted
to do anything they want, aren't they? Isn't it
just "implementation dependent" with a restriction
that it not have side effects? And if you redirect
these URIs, don't you have the issue of making sure
the redirection doesn't result in side effects?



Section 5.2 lists things as "examples" but then claims
they are "common". Perhaps these aren't "examples"
but "common usage"? Again, the wikipedia page is
more useful.

What about about:html-compat?


"The HTML representation of the URI "about:blank" MUST use the origin
   and the effective script origin as defined by HTML5 Section 5.4
   Origin [W3C.WD-html5]"

but the HTML representation of the URI "about:blank"
is not defined as something that has an origin or
an effective script origin in most deployed software,
it's just an empty resource. So this MUST doesn't
make sense in the context given.
This advice could be conditioned on the HTML interpreter
actually being compliant with html5, but then this
doesn't really belong in the registration of about:,
whose use is already widely deployed.

Larry
--
http://larry.masinter.net


-----Original Message-----
From: uri-request@w3.org [mailto:uri-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Joseph A Holsten
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 10:53 PM
To: uri-review@ietf.org
Subject: about: scheme; Simplified Encoding Considerations

URI people:

I intend to replace the current about: scheme Encoding  
Considerations[1]:

    Because many characters are not permitted with this syntax, the
    "segment" and "query" elements may contain characters from the
    Unicode Character Set [UCS] as suggested by URI [RFC3986], by first
    encoding those characters as octets to the UTF-8 character encoding
    [RFC3629]; then only those octets that do not correspond to
    characters in the unreserved set should be percent-encoded.

    By using UTF-8 encoding, there are no known compatibility issues  
with
    mapping Internationlized Resource Identifiers to about URIs  
according
    to [RFC3987].  Since about URIs do not use domain names, "ireg-name"
    conversion is unnecessary.

with the following (adapted from hixie's ws: scheme[2]):

    Characters in the "segment" or "query" parts that are excluded by  
the
    syntax defined above must be converted from Unicode to ASCII by  
first
    encoding the characters as UTF-8 and then replacing the  
corresponding
    bytes using their percent-encoded form as defined in the URI and IRI
    specifications. [RFC3986] [RFC3987]

Any objections or issues?


1: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-holsten-about-uri-scheme-02#section-4
2: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hixie-thewebsocketprotocol-41#section-8.1

--
Joseph Holsten
http://josephholsten.com
mailto:joseph@josephholsten.com
tel:+1-918-948-6747