On 12/02/2014 02:22 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
On 12/01/2014 10:22 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Domenic Denicola <d...@domenic.me> wrote:
What we really need to do is get some popular library or website to take
a
dependency on mobile Chrome or mobile Safari's file URL parsing. *Then*
we'd
get interoperability, and quite quickly I'd imagine.
To my knowledge, all browsers explicitly block websites from having
any interactions with file:// URLs. I.e. they don't allow loading an
<img> from file:// or even link to a file:// HTML page using <a
href="file://...">. Even though both those are generally allowed cross
origin.
So it's very difficult for webpages to depend on the behavior of
file:// parsing, even if they were to intentionally try.
Relevant related reading, look at the description that the current URL
Living Standard provides for the origin for file: URLs:
https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#origin
I tend to agree with Jonas. Ideally the spec would match existing browser
behavior. When that's not possible, getting agreements from browser vendors
on the direction would suffice.
When neither exist, a more accurate description (such as the one cited above
in the Origin part of the URL Standard) is appropriate.
To be clear, I'm proposing to remove any and all normative definition
of file:// handling from the spec. Because I don't think there is
interoperability, nor do I think that it's particularly high priority
to archive it.
A bug has been file on your behalf:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27518
In response, I suggest that your proposal is a bit too extreme, and I
suggest dialing it back a bit.
/ Jonas
- Sam Ruby
