On 6/1/2016 1:57 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 12:37:08PM +0200, Stefan Hett wrote:
So with the change we are
actually resolving problems for more standard compliant and also for older
browsers working on that page.
Do you have any evidence of browsers not accepting that link?
Based on what Daniel Stenberg wrote here:
https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2016/05/11/my-url-isnt-your-url/
I would expect that most browsers will happily accept it.
I don't have any evidence here and I would agree with your assumption
that most likely most tools/browsers would accept/handle the old/current
id-reference. Still, I would not make the blunt (no offense intended)
statement about proposing that ALL browsers/tools do so (in relation to
that, see Daniel's statement/proof that not all browsers accept URLs
with an indefinite amount of slashes as in "http://///////foo.bar"; :-) -
btw. I enjoyed reading his blog during my lunchbreak - thanks ;) ).
IMO it shouldn't also matter much whether there is such a browser/tool
out there and it also shouldn't matter much how widespread that
browser/tool would be. The mere point of violating the standard there
should be what matters for making the decision here. The question is
just how much weight does that argument (violating the XHTML/HTML4.x
standard) carry compared to the other arguments (aka: possibility to
break existing links in the wild with the old/bad format).
I made my call here, but I can also fully understand if the rest of the
world sees it different than I do. ;-)
--
Regards,
Stefan Hett
