On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 01:40:31 +0100, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Simon Pieters wrote:
> > >
> > > I've now looked at a selection of random URLs.
> > >
> > > Conclusion: None of these seem to need a request to be made. img
> > > should f
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 17:53 +0100, Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 01:40:31 +0100, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Simon Pieters wrote:
> >>
> >> I've now looked at a selection of random URLs.
> >>
> >> Conclusion: None of these seem to need a request to be made. img sho
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 01:40:31 +0100, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Simon Pieters wrote:
I've now looked at a selection of random URLs.
Conclusion: None of these seem to need a request to be made. img should
fire an error event. iframe and frame should use about:blank.
Did you miss
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
>
> [...] I found that there are several instances where the browser will
> make a second [request] to the page based on resolving empty-string URLs
> in the several tags.
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
>
> This is clearly not a good idea for
;
Morpheus: "My beliefs do not require them to."
-Original Message-
From: Ian Hickson [mailto:i...@hixie.ch]
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:21 PM
To: Nicholas Zakas
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
On Tue, 12 Jan 2
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
>
> Sorry to pester, but I want to make sure this comes to resolution before
> it's forgotten. Any other feedback?
Don't worry, all e-mail sent to this list ends up in a pile that I
eventually go through and reply to. You can see all the e-mail pending
not require them to."
-Original Message-
From: Jonas Sicking [mailto:jo...@sicking.cc]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 1:09 PM
To: Nicholas Zakas
Cc: Simon Pieters; Maciej Stachowiak; whatwg@lists.whatwg.org; Aryeh
Gregor
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
> I'm going to take a lack of response to this question as a "no". :)
>
> Given the disparate browser implementations for dealing with empty
> string URLs, it seems unlikely that anyone is relying upon the current
> behaviors, so I'd like to su
I'm going to take a lack of response to this question as a "no". :)
Given the disparate browser implementations for dealing with empty
string URLs, it seems unlikely that anyone is relying upon the current
behaviors, so I'd like to suggest this change be added to HTML5:
For any , ,
Aryeh Gregor
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:03:01 +0100, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
> Here are the results of testing various tags with empty URLs across
> different browsers. The table below indicates how many requests are
sent
> wh
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:03:01 +0100, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
Here are the results of testing various tags with empty URLs across
different browsers. The table below indicates how many requests are sent
when the given tag is encountered on the page (curiously, Firefox 3
sometimes sends two extra
Apologies, the formatting didn't come out how I had hoped. :)
Here's another attempt:
IE7 IE8 FF3 FF3.5
1 1 1 0
0 0 1 1
0 0 2
Here are the results of testing various tags with empty URLs across
different browsers. The table below indicates how many requests are sent
when the given tag is encountered on the page (curiously, Firefox 3
sometimes sends two extra requests). Even though the tags don't
show it in the table, the
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 01:51:44 +0100, Simon Pieters wrote:
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:58:03 +0100, Simon Pieters
wrote:
I asked Philip to provide some data about pages using empty attributes
for these:
zcorpan: http://philip.html5.org/data/empty-url-attributes.txt
zcorpan:
http://philip.h
whatwg.org
[mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Simon Pieters
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 2:44 PM
To: Nicholas Zakas; Jonas Sicking
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak; whatwg@lists.whatwg.org; Aryeh Gregor
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
On Thu, 1
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:58:03 +0100, Simon Pieters wrote:
I asked Philip to provide some data about pages using empty attributes
for these:
zcorpan: http://philip.html5.org/data/empty-url-attributes.txt
zcorpan:
http://philip.html5.org/data/empty-url-link-attributes.txt
I have not look
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:20:38 +0100, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
Simon,
Here's a list for the first four I mentioned:
Nice. Could you test the others as well, and maybe make a table on the
whatwg wiki or something? :-)
Is the result different if the base URL is different from the document's
Simon,
Here's a list for the first four I mentioned:
IE 8 and earlier: makes a request
FF 3 and earlier: makes a request
FF 3.5: does not make a request
Safari 4 and earlier: makes a request
Chrome 3 and earlier: makes a request
Opera 10 and earlier: does not make a request
IE 8 and earlier: d
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:21:01 +0100, Jonas Sicking wrote:
So the specific list would then be:
I think only icon, prefetch and stylesheet links.
The following element defines two links, one of which would be ignored:
Sounds good.
..@sicking.cc]
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 8:21 AM
To: Simon Pieters
Cc: Nicholas Zakas; Maciej Stachowiak; whatwg@lists.whatwg.org; Aryeh Gregor
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Dec 200
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 02:21:33 +0100, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Nicholas Zakas
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Here's what I would propose:
>>>
>>> 1. Empty string attributes for HTML elements specifying resources to
>>> au
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 02:21:33 +0100, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
Here's what I would propose:
1. Empty string attributes for HTML elements specifying resources to
automatically download are considered invalid and don't cause a request
to be sen
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> For example not all s are automatically downloaded, such as
>> . However I suspect that we'll want all s to
>> behave the same.
>
> I'd say the rule should be that if the type is text/h
Aryeh Gregor; Simon
> Pieters
> Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Nicholas Zakas
> wrote:
> > Here's what I would propose:
> >
> > 1. Empty string attributes for HTML elements specifying
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> For example not all s are automatically downloaded, such as
> . However I suspect that we'll want all s to
> behave the same.
I'd say the rule should be that if the type is text/html or unknown,
"" should work. If it's known to be some othe
g.cc]
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 5:22 PM
To: Nicholas Zakas
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak; whatwg@lists.whatwg.org; Aryeh Gregor; Simon
Pieters
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
> Here's what I would
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
> Here's what I would propose:
>
> 1. Empty string attributes for HTML elements specifying resources to
> automatically download are considered invalid and don't cause a request
> to be sent. Examples: , ,
Here's what I would propose:
1. Empty string attributes for HTML elements specifying resources to
automatically download are considered invalid and don't cause a request
to be sent. Examples: , ,
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
> Is it necessary to apply this within XSLT and CSS as well? Or is it
> possible to have this be an HTML-only feature? I'd be happy with the
> latter.
Nothing is required. But we do need a concrete proposal that everyone agrees on.
/ Jonas
;
Morpheus: "My beliefs do not require them to."
-Original Message-
From: Jonas Sicking [mailto:jo...@sicking.cc]
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 9:37 AM
To: Maciej Stachowiak
Cc: Nicholas Zakas; whatwg@lists.whatwg.org; Aryeh Gregor; Simon Pieters
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> I think "#" should work as well.
Good point.
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:44 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> Does anyone have data on what, if any, compatibility impact this has? I
> can't imagine loading the base URL to be terribly useful in most cases, but
> perhaps there are wacky sites that do indeed rely on it.
Given that opera has this so
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 6:16 AM, James May wrote:
>> If this change is made, what is the correct (explicit) way to refer to the
>> current URL? "." ?
>
> No, that will return the file in the current directory named ".".
> This might be the cu
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 6:16 AM, James May wrote:
> If this change is made, what is the correct (explicit) way to refer to the
> current URL? "." ?
No, that will return the file in the current directory named ".".
This might be the current directory itself. You would have to say
"foo.html" or su
ot require them to."
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org
>> [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Nicholas Zakas
>> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 10:15 AM
>> To: Simon Pieters; Anne van Kesteren; Aryeh G
Friday, December 11, 2009 10:15 AM
To: Simon Pieters; Anne van Kesteren; Aryeh Gregor
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
I agree, automatic downloads are the real issue. is fine
because a user must initiate the action (and thus generate
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:08:40 +0100, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
It seems that thusfar, Jonas from Mozilla is open to this change. Is
there anyone from Opera or WebKit that would like to chime in either in
favor or opposition?
It appears that Opera already does this (though I haven't tested SVG or
eh Gregor
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
I agree, automatic downloads are the real issue. is fine
because a user must initiate the action (and thus generate a "real"
pageview).
I'd think that the behavior should be the same in
las Zakas; Anne van Kesteren; Aryeh Gregor
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:22:43 +0100, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
> I'd be happy to make the compromise that this applies to markup but
not
> to JavaScript AP
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:22:43 +0100, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
It's the "automatic download" that makes this problematic, as it
silently doubles the number of requests to the server, which as I've
said in previous emails, is a huge problem for high-volume sites. Opera
already doesn't make a request
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:22:43 +0100, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
I'd be happy to make the compromise that this applies to markup but not
to JavaScript APIs.
I think it shouldn't apply to markup that doesn't download things
automatically; in particular should work.
What about URLs in CSS and S
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
> Sweet, so how can we get this done? :)
Just gotta convince the other browser vendors that this is a good idea ;)
/ Jonas
Morpheus: "My beliefs do not require them to."
-Original Message-
From: Anne van Kesteren [mailto:ann...@opera.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 1:56 AM
To: Nicholas Zakas; Simon Pieters; Aryeh Gregor
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-st
lto:jo...@sicking.cc]
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:56 PM
To: Nicholas Zakas
Cc: Simon Pieters; Aryeh Gregor; whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
> Just curious if anyone knows why
On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 21:14:00 +0100, Nicholas Zakas
wrote:
Can the self-reference exception become the rule and apply to all
of these tags the same way?
If we'd also apply it to APIs that would be annoying actually. We have a
bunch of Web Workers tests that rely on this working fine.
What
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
> Just curious if anyone knows why is the exception in the
> spec, rather than having the same behavior for all elements that
> download resources on page load? As far as I can tell, the spec would
> currently allow self-referencing downloads
al Message-
From: whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org
[mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Nicholas Zakas
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 9:43 AM
To: Simon Pieters; Aryeh Gregor
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
The change se
atwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Inconsistent behavior for empty-string URLs
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:52:41 +0100, Aryeh Gregor
wrote:
> I don't know why has a special exception. It would be
> possible to look through the svn log to see if there was a helpful
> commit message, or maybe
heus: "My beliefs do not require them to."
-Original Message-
From: whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org]
On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 9:53 PM
To: Nicholas Zakas
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] I
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:26 AM, Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:52:41 +0100, Aryeh Gregor
> wrote:
>
>> I don't know why has a special exception. It would be
>> possible to look through the svn log to see if there was a helpful
>> commit message, or maybe someone will remember.
>
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:52:41 +0100, Aryeh Gregor
wrote:
I don't know why has a special exception. It would be
possible to look through the svn log to see if there was a helpful
commit message, or maybe someone will remember.
I seem to remember someone from Mozilla mentioned that they rece
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> In a recent investigation into capacity issues, I found that there are
> several instances where the browser will make a second to the page based on
> resolving empty-string URLs in the several tags. I tested four instances:
> ,
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
> The reason I think this is important is because the "just fetch the
> resource again" behavior is inherently destructive and unexpected. When
> one of these appears on a page, page views double. This isn't a problem
> if it's your personal bl
everyone believes what you
believe!"
Morpheus: "My beliefs do not require them to."
-Original Message-
From: simetri...@gmail.com [mailto:simetri...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Aryeh Gregor
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 11:44 AM
To: Nicholas Zakas
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Sub
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
> Presently, HTML5 does provide guidance on the correct behavior for src=””> in section 4.8.2, indicating that Firefox 3.5’s and Opera 10’s
> behavior in this regard is correct:
>
> “If the base URI of the element is the same as the document’s
55 matches
Mail list logo
