ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [whatwg] New URL Standard from Anne van Kesteren on 2012-09-24 (public-whatwg-archive(_at_)w3(_dot_)org from September 2012)

2012-10-22 17:13:32
On 2012-10-22 23:46, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2012, Julian Reschke wrote:

I couldn't agree more! We've been waiting for four years for the URI
working group to get their act together and fix the URL mess. Nothing
has happened. We lost patience and are now doing it ourselves. ...

Clarifying: there is no URI Working Group, and as far as I can tell,

Whoever. The people complaining that it should be done at the IETF haven't
done any work. That's the complaint. Until they do the work, complaining
that we're doing it instead is going to fall on deaf ears and be met with
the rolling of eyeballs.

This always was about venue, not people. If people want to "fix" or "augment" URIs/IRIs, they should come over to the IETF. That's where the specs live. The IETF is open to anyone, works async on mailing lists, and doesn't require any membership fees. I don't think there's any standards body that is *more* open to individuals.

But yes, you may have to convince a few people outside the WhatWG. That's a feature. It means more review from people outside the browser ecosystem.

there is no consensus that there is a "mess" to fix related to URIs.

The specs don't define everything that implementations have to do to be
interoperable. If the IETF doesn't think that's a problem, then that's
fine, but then y'all shouldn't be surprised when people who _do_ think
that's a problem try and fix it.

Yes, please fix *that*, but *just* that without messing with the basics without consensus/review.

So yes: if you feel you need to make \ to equivalent to /, that may be ok (as \ isn't valid anyway). But changing the reference resolution algorithm for valid URI/reference pairs is something entirely different. *If* it needs to be done, it needs to be done within the scope of the URI spec.

Best regards, Julian

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>