[whatwg] Web Addresses vs Legacy Extended IRI
Anne van Kesteren
annevk at opera.com
Mon Mar 23 03:03:30 PDT 2009
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:45:39 +0100, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de>
wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> ...
>> Note that the Web addresses draft isn't specific to HTML5. It is
>> intended to apply to any user agent that interacts with Web content,
>> not just Web browsers and HTML. (That's why we took it out of HTML5.)
>> ...
>
> Be careful; depending on what you call "Web content". For instance, I
> would consider the Atom feed content (RFC4287) as "Web content", but
> Atom really uses IRIs, and doesn't need workarounds for broken IRIs in
> content (as far as I can tell).
Are you sure browser implementations of feeds reject non-IRIs in some way?
I would expect them to use the same URL handling everywhere.
> Don't leak out workarounds into areas where they aren't needed.
I'm not convinced that having two ways of handling essentially the same
thing is good.
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
More information about the whatwg
mailing list