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

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 6/15/11 5:07 AM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
Applications SHOULD resolve unrecognized "about" URIs in the
same way as "about:blank".
...

I don't think MAY is fine here, as this is a recommendation.

I'm questioning it being a recommendation, is the point. Why is this behavior recommended, exactly? Given lack of existing interop and lack of a MUST-level requirement here, the only reason for a SHOULD would be if the behavior is believed to be better than other alternatives, right? Is it? I don't see why.

The point of this comment is to propose abandoning normalization of
'about' URIs because of some ad hoc behavior of an only application -
Gecko.

No, it's to propose abandoning normalization because it's not necessarily compatible with existing deployed uses of about:, not clearly compatible with the web security model, and because the normalization is not defined in the spec. The Gecko behavior is just an illustration of the first point.

The purpose of our draft is to give a stable specification of the
scheme

Yes, this is fine.

and normalize all existing types of behavior with regard to
handling 'about' URIs. It will be easier for Gecko to change its
behavior rather than for other apps to do this.

That's not clear to me given the security implications. Do you have data to back this up?

Boris, could you please let me know whether you have some strong opinion
regarding your January comments/insist on incorporating them in the draft.

See above.

-Boris
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]