Howdy, Some comments in-line. On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@xxxxxx> wrote: > On 21.01.2011 02:13, Ted Hardie wrote: >> >> ... >> But the reality is that the behavior resulting from these URIs is totally >> non-deterministic and varies from context to context. In most contexts >> outside of a browser location bar, they are meaningless. Inside that >> context, the browser's definition seems to be definitive. If the aim >> is only to get about:blank fully specified, I'd suggest saying so >> outright, >> and noting clearly that all other uses are context-dependent, with >> returning about:blank recommended practice for those unknown. >> ... > > That sounds reasonable. Let's not make it more complicated than it needs to > be. > Okay. >> As a thought experiment, would the W3C counsel against the presence >> of an about URI in an XML namespace? > > Reminder: the reason this was written down was so that "about:legacy-compat" > can be specified as XML system identifier in HTML5 > (<http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-doctype>). > This rationale isn't in the draft, nor is the token legacy-compat. Having looked at the section you reference, I see it also defines about:srcdoc as reserved, unresolvable URI. It should be included in this doc, if it goes forward. That said, I note that HTML5 has a number of what it calls "willful violations" of the URI spec, in which it counsels the reading who actually knows what the spec says to pretend it was using a term other than URI. (One of these is just past the fragment identifier used above). Most uses of about are outliers in the URI world by a long chalk. Why not simply define about as a different identifier form that happens to have a colon in it (which, broadly, it is) and make its use as system identifier in HTML5 a "willful violation" of the XML spec? That seems entirely consistent with the document's modus operandi and save IANA the trouble of setting up a registry. best regards, Ted >> Additionally, naming a change controller should generally be a bit more >> precise than an organization name. The W3C director or TAG seems >> more appropriate than just "W3C". > > I just checked an image/svg+xml has "W3C" as change controller. Why would > the requirement be different here? > > Best regards, Julian > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf