[whatwg] Subsequent access to empty string URLs (Was: Base URL’s effect on an empty @src element)
Leif Halvard Silli
xn--mlform-iua at xn--mlform-iua.no
Wed May 1 12:45:31 PDT 2013
Anne van Kesteren on Wed May 1 09:46:50 PDT 2013:
> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>> Interesting. Certainly at the point when Gecko implemented the current
>> behavior I recall it matching the spec…
Thanks so much, Darin, Boris and Anne.
> Changed in: http://html5.org/r/4841
FOLLOW-UP on src="<empty>":
If @src is empty (and there is no base url) a 'subsequent access' via
a contextual menu, such as 'Show/Open image' or 'Save/Download image'
has no effect in Firefox20, Opera12, IE10. Whereas Safari/Chrome do
provide a contextual menu item for those features. (And the UA results
are the same - except with regard to Firefox, also if there *is* a base
Webkit/Blink seems inconsistent/buggy, right?
A special detail is the last paragraph of section '2.5.3 Dynamic
changes to base URLS' which implies that a change to the base URL
should (even when @src is empty, one must assume, not?) affect the @src
URL so that a 'subsequent access' via context menu could be used to
e.g. open the image resource set by the base URL. Is it meaningful?
By now, only Webkit/Blink let base URL affect the subsequent access.
(And Firefox, but that's because of the bug.)
FOLLOW-UP w.r.t. cite="<empty>" and longdesc="<empty>":
What if @cite or @longdesc are empty? Personally, I think it would
be simplest to handle at least @longesc - but probably @cite too - the
same way that @src is handled. The relevance to subsequent access to
empty @src is that @longdesc and @cite tend, from users’ point of view,
to be subsequently accessed (e.g. via context menu).
Currently, the HTML spec doesn't even require the @cite attribute to
be a *non-empty* URL - thus it can be empty. By contrast, the
@longdesc cannot be empty. What is the use case for an empty @cite
For @longdesc, the ‘trend’ of implementations is to ignore the
longdesc when it is the empty string. And basically, my motivation
for these letters is to make sure that the longdesc spec can safely say
- without conflicting with anything else - that implementations should
ignore empty longdesc attributes.
leif halvard silli
More information about the whatwg