This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 26988 - We need a way to parse URLs without decoding the fragment identifier
Summary: We need a way to parse URLs without decoding the fragment identifier
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 27252
Alias: None
Product: WHATWG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: URL (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: Unsorted
Assignee: Anne
QA Contact: sideshowbarker+urlspec
URL: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#scroll-...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2014-10-06 17:56 UTC by contributor
Modified: 2014-11-27 10:28 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description contributor 2014-10-06 17:56:01 UTC 
Specification: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/
Multipage: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/#scroll-to-fragid:url-2
Complete: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#scroll-to-fragid:url-2
Referrer: 

Comment:
We need a way to parse URLs without decoding the fragment identifier (then
that should be used in the "indicated part of the document" algorithm)

Posted from: 173.8.185.154
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_9_5) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/39.0.2171.7 Safari/537.36
Comment 1 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2014-10-06 17:58:22 UTC 
Anne, please reassign this to me once you have a way for me to get a non-decoded frag ID. Thanks!
Comment 2 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2014-10-06 18:12:15 UTC 
Actually looks like only Chrome and WebKit do this crazy "scroll to id='te%20st' without decoding the fragid" thing. So maybe this should be WONTFIX, and a new bug should be filed to remove the bad logic in HTML. (IE and Firefox just go to "te st" and ignore id="te%20st" in the tests below.)

   http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/html/navigation/fragids/
Comment 4 Anne 2014-10-07 08:51:36 UTC 
What is somewhat weird is that Gecko removes the %20 upon parsing in the fragment component as it does not do that in the path. It's not clear to me Gecko is actually correct here although any kind of change here is probably going to be very painful.
Comment 5 Sam Ruby 2014-11-07 01:27:43 UTC 
Related discussion: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2014Nov/0000.html
Comment 6 Anne 2014-11-27 10:28:39 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 27252 ***