- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:41:28 +0100
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 12:38:30 +0100, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > On 14.11.2010 12:35, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 12:17:56 +0100, Julian Reschke >> <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >>> On 13.11.2010 22:49, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >>>> I don't have strong data on the compatibility impact of this specific >>>> change, but when we diverge from both Firefox and IE, it is rarely on >>>> purpose, and matching them has almost always fixed bugs, even if we >>>> didn't know it at the time. >>> >>> I'm confident that it really doesn't matter in practice, in which case >>> we should default on being consistent with the base specs. >> >> Because you are confident? Specifications are at the bottom of the >> priority of constituencies. Better safe than sorry in my opinion. > > But how do you know it's safer when UAs currently do not agree on > processing, and seem to get away with it? As Maciej indicated, they are starting to converge. > Sometimes it *really* doesn't matter, in which case considerations like > consistency and re-usability of code should be taken into account. It is funny that you say that while also advocating having separate URL processors throughout the code. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 16 November 2010 12:42:16 UTC