12986 2011-06-18 08:06:45 +0000 Last Call comments to HTML5 2011-08-10 03:05:44 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG LC1 HTML5 spec unspecified Other All CLOSED DUPLICATE 13724 http://www.w3.org/mid/4DFC5AC4.7030105@gmail.com P3 normal --- 13719 13720 13721 13722 13723 13724 1 mike+html-wg-mailbot contributor evnikita2 ian jan.varga julian.reschke mike public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 49826 0 mike+html-wg-mailbot 2011-06-18 08:06:45 +0000 public-html-comments posting from: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com> http://www.w3.org/mid/4DFC5AC4.7030105@gmail.com Hello, Mark Nottingham, who is IETF/W3C liaison, notified folks at the IETF that HTML WG started LC on HTML5 specifications. I'd like to provide some comments with regard to URIs in the HTML5 specification. (This message was initially sent to apps-discuss@ietf.org list). Some additions are in-line. > Hello, > > I see the proposed HTML5 specification has the following text (Section > 2.6.1): > >> This specification defines the URL |about:legacy-compat| as a >> reserved, though unresolvable, |about:| URI, for use in DOCTYPE >> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#syntax-doctype>s in HTML >> documents <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#html-documents> >> when needed for compatibility with XML tools. [ABOUT] >> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#refsABOUT> >> >> This specification defines the URL |about:srcdoc| as a reserved, >> though unresolvable, |about:| URI, that is used as the document's >> address >> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-document-s-address> >> of |iframe| |srcdoc| documents >> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#an-iframe-srcdoc-document>. >> [ABOUT] <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#refsABOUT> >> > Moreover, the [ABOUT] references the well-known > draft-holsten-about-uri-scheme which we have had a lot of discussions > on. Considering that there isn't a strong decision on this draft, I'd > recommend W3C not to include this text in the proposed document. > Mentioning that "about:legacy-compat" is to be used for a specific > purpose in Section 8.1.1 (the same is with "about:srcdoc") seems fine > to me. Currently, this Internet-Draft is being actively discussed at IETF; we haven't reached some stable consensus with regard to it. See archives at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/maillist.html for these discussions. > > Probably the same is with 'javascript' URIs (Section 6.1.5). It > references [JSURL], the draft-hoehrmann-javascript-scheme, which is > now expired. It includes-by-reference the source code retrieval > operation for these URIs > (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoehrmann-javascript-scheme-03#section-3.1). > I propose not to include it by reference but rather describe in the > specification itself. The algorithm contains only 4 steps so it > shouldn't be a problem. > > An editorial comment. I see the document using such terms as "mailto: > URL", "data: URL", "javascript: URL" etc. An example is (Section 2.1.1): > >> The term |data:| URL refers to URLs >> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#url> that use the |data:| >> scheme. > Considering the string before "URL" identifies the scheme, I'd > recommend not to include ":" (colon) their, since this character isn't > a part of the scheme name (but rather a delimiter). Having "scheme > URL" or " 'scheme' URL " (I personally prefer the last) is OK. > > With regard to references. The [MAILTO] references the document which > was obsoleted by RFC 6068. [COOKIES] has become RFC 6265 (the link > should be fixed). References to Internet-Drafts should be given as > "Work in Progress" per RFC 2026. > > Probably Section 2.6, as well as some other URI-related stuff, can be > interested for some people on uri@w3.org list so I'll forward the LC > announcement there to encourage their feedback. I've already sent a note to this list. Mykyta Yevstifeyev > > All the best, > Mykyta Yevstifeyev > > 17.06.2011 23:45, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> [ with my IETF/W3C Liaison hat on ] >> >> The W3C has announced a Last Call on the HTML5 specification; see: >> http://www.w3.org/2011/02/htmlwg-pr.html >> >> The IETF has been encouraged to provide feedback, especially regarding HTML's use of and interface with IETF technologies. >> >> For background on Last Call in their process, see: >> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#last-call >> >> and the specification itself: >> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/ >> paying special attention to the 'status of this document' section for information about the Last Call and how to provide feedback. >> >> See also their LC FAQ: >> http://www.w3.org/2011/05/html5lc-faq.html >> >> Cheers, >> >> -- >> Mark Nottinghamhttp://www.mnot.net/ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> apps-discuss mailing list >> apps-discuss@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss >> 52553 1 mike 2011-08-04 05:02:32 +0000 mass-moved component to LC1 54533 2 ian 2011-08-10 01:27:59 +0000 Could someone split this into one issue per bug? 54558 3 mike 2011-08-10 03:05:29 +0000 split out into bug 13719, bug 13720, bug 13721, bug 13722 , bug 13723, bug 13724 Mykyta, I recommend you add yourself to the Cc list for those bugs. I'm closing this one. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 13724 ***