On 2011-06-16 11:20, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
On 2011-06-16 11:14, Julian Reschke wrote:
On the other hand, you're trying to define a URI scheme. If it's
handling conflicts with the base URI spec, that's a bug. Period. You may
*document* that some UAs have this bug, but you can't change it to be
not a bug.
Theoretical purity is not a priority for the specs I edit. Wilful
violations of other specs where necessary are acceptable.
Lachlan, with all due respect, I really do not care what *your*
priorities here are.
If you define a URI scheme, you'll have to be consistent with URI
syntax. There's really no wiggle room except for warning about
implementations that may not do it right.
Best regards, Julian
Ietf mailing list