://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/url-merge.html
See the readme for more information on webspecs:
https://github.com/webspecs/url#readme
- Sam Ruby
is that I'm working on rewriting the URL
parser per https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25946, and
would like to update the https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#host-parsing to be
consistent.
- Sam Ruby
On 11/21/2014 05:32 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net]
I guess I didn't make the point clearly before. This is not a
waterfall process where somebody writes down a spec and expects
implementations to eventually catch up. That line of thinking
without a test, and so on.
Thanks! I've tried to follow the example that the streams spec is
providing. Including the naming of directories.
From: whatwg [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Sam Ruby
https://url.spec.whatwg.org/interop/urltest-results/
I'd be interested
On 11/19/2014 09:32 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net]
Done, sort-of: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/interop/browser-results/
Excellent, this is a great subset to have.
I am curious what it means when testdata is in the user agents with
differences
On 11/19/2014 09:55 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net]
These results compare user agents against each other. The testdata
is provided for reference.
Then why is testdata listed as a user agent?
It clearly is mislabled. Pull requests welcome
differences from the published standard:
intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/url.html
- Sam Ruby
will be. In each
case of a known difference in published results, I've linked to
rationale for the change (generally to an indication that Anne agrees).
I hope this helps.
- Sam Ruby
/x
Of course, if there are any bugs in the proposed reference
implementation, I'm interested in that too.
- Sam Ruby
On 11/04/2014 09:32 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
To help foster discussion, I've made an alternate version of the live URL
parser page, one that enables setting of the base URL:
http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl
-IE browsers. I had to add the former
to get IE working.
But, as you undoubtedly have noted, unknown base schemes seem to cause
IE too ignore the base URL entirely.
- Sam Ruby
On 11/02/2014 02:32 PM, Graham Klyne wrote:
On 01/11/2014 00:01, Sam Ruby wrote:
3) Explicitly state that canonical URLs (i.e., the output of the URL
parse step)
not only round trip but also are valid URIs. If there are any RFC
3986 errata
and/or willful violations necessary to make
On 11/1/14 5:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
Meanwhile, The IETF is actively working on a update:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-uri-scheme-reg-04
They are meeting F2F in a little over a week. URIs
On 11/1/14 7:56 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On 11/1/14 5:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
It doesn't say that. (We should perhaps try to find some way to make
{scheme}:// syntax work for schemes that are not problematic
to 3986.
- Sam Ruby
Barry, IETF Applications AD
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
bcc: WebApps, IETF, TAG in the hopes that replies go to a single place.
- - -
I took the opportunity this week to meet with a number of parties interested
in the topic
describe above were
done, the IETF would be open to the idea of errata to RFC3987 and
updating specs to reference URLs.
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/url.html
[2] https://www.ietf.org/meeting/91/index.html
[3] https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#relative-scheme
On 10/30/14 2:09 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/urltest-results/d674c14cbe
I'll note that galimatias doesn't produce a parse error in this case (and,
in fact, the state machine
here:
https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#host-state
And the following only defines fatal errors (e.g. step 5);
https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-host-parser
My proposed reference implementation does indicate a parse error with
these inputs, but this could easily be removed.
- Sam Ruby
On 10/29/14 4:47 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
2) Is the following expected to product a parse error:
http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/urltest-results/bc6ea8bdf8 ?
What is the DNS violation supposed to mean?
I
On 10/29/14 4:47 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
1) Is the following expected to produce a parse error:
http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/urltest-results/4b60e32190 ?
My reading of https://url.spec.whatwg.org
On 10/14/2014 03:41 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:05 AM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
1) rows where the notes merely say href are cases where parse errors are
thrown and failure is returned. The expected results are an object that
returns the original href
On 10/14/2014 05:49 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
At the present time, all I can say is that the https://url.spec.whatwg.org/,
https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/blob/master/url/, and
https://github.com/annevk/url
.
- Sam Ruby
sections, and comments that
identify step numbers.
- Sam Ruby
P.S. I didn't update to the latest test data yet; but from what I can
see the changes wouldn't materially affect the results, so I am
publishing now.
P.P.S. Preview of what is yet to come, ruby2js run against my
implementation
On 10/12/2014 04:18 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On 10/10/2014 08:19 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
2) https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-basic-url-parser
I'm interpreting terminate this algorithm and return failure
On 10/10/2014 08:19 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
I've now completed step 1, as described at [1].
Here are my questions/comments:
1) https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-code-points
U+D8000 to U+DFFFD are invalid as they are within the UTF-16
surrogate range
Disregard this comment, it turns out
of
the path will be accumulated into buffer, but that buffer will never
be added to the path
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2014Oct/0053.html
On 10/06/2014 12:42 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2014/10/05/urltest-results/24f081633d
This does not match what I find in browsers. (I did not look through
the list exhaustively, see below
On 10/06/2014 12:59 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On 10/06/2014 12:42 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2014/10/05/urltest
:
http://intertwingly.net/blog/2014/10/02/WHATWG-URL-vs-IETF-URI
- Sam Ruby
[1]
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/master/url/urltestdata.txt
which goes from
the 15th of May to the 17th of May.
Thanks!
- Sam Ruby
recovery, which IMHO isn't required.
- Sam Ruby
as it is currently described in the WHATWG draft?
Most importantly, how can we deescalate tensions rather that
continuing in this manner?
- Sam Ruby
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
Yet, when you made the change, you did it in a way that made the
WHATWG version not a proper superset.
On closer reading, it turns out that I was incorrect here. It still,
however, remains a divergence, it still is mis
that such a discussion happen on a publicly archived
mailing list.
- Sam Ruby
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
While I agree that it is helpful for us to cooperate, I should point out
that the WHATWG was never formally approached
as a Working Draft. You are welcome to do
likewise[2].
JF
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#first-wd
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0627.html
John Foliot wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Really? This appears to be exactly the single, special status
privilege
currently reserved for Ian Hickson.
False.
...and yes, I stand corrected. Although the *impression* that this is the
current status remains fairly pervasive; however I will endeavor
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Shelley Powers
shell...@burningbird.net wrote:
I
would say if your fellow Google developers could understand how this all
works, there is hope for others.
if
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009May/0064.html
Shelley
- Sam Ruby
change by browser vendors, which also is a cost that needs to
be factored in. But right now, I am interested in how it would affect
the web if this were done.
--
Henri Sivonen
hsivo...@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
- Sam Ruby
Key to Ian's decision was the importance of DOM integration for this
vocabulary. If DOM integration is essential for RDFa, then perhaps
the same principles apply. If not, perhaps some other principles may
apply.
- Sam Ruby
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Dan Brickley dan...@danbri.org wrote:
On 17/1/09 19:27, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Shelley Powers
shell...@burningbird.net wrote:
The debate about RDFa highlights a disconnect in the decision making
related
to HTML5.
Perhaps
into the options
and making recommendations may help.
- Sam Ruby
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Shelley Powers
shell...@burningbird.net wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Shelley Powers
shell...@burningbird.net wrote:
I propose that RDFa is the best solution to the use case Martin supplied,
and we've shown how
named
xmlns:foo.
There is a similar inconsistency in how xml:lang is handled. Discuss.
--
Henri Sivonen
hsivo...@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
- Sam Ruby
On Jan 23, 2008 2:13 PM, Krzysztof Żelechowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SVG is too heavyweight
for the purpose of such tiny presentational enhancements.
I can provide counterexamples:
http://intertwingly.net/blog/
http://intertwingly.net/blog/archives/
- Sam Ruby
a failure on a test named
test_title_body_named_charref.
Before, A mdash B == A — B, now A mdash B == A amp;mdash B.
Is that what we really want? Testing with Firefox, the old behavior
is preferable.
- Sam Ruby
.
- Sam Ruby
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Apr 10, 2007, at 8:12 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Apr 10, 2007, at 2:14 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:41:12 +0200, Sam Ruby
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How so?
I missed the part where you wanted to change
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:40:39 +0200, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Per HTML5 section 8.1.2.3, however, such an attribute name would not
be considered conformant.
Yes, only attributes defined in the specification are conformant.
I was specifically referring
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:40:39 +0200, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
To give a specific example: say I make my own mjsml prefix with
namespace http://example.org/mjsml;. In HTML4 UAs, to look up an
mjsml:extension attribute using getAttribute(mjsml:extension
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:53:21 +0200, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:40:39 +0200, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Per HTML5 section 8.1.2.3, however, such an attribute name would not
be considered conformant.
Yes
differently than in XML. While Python's minidom
does not appear to produce the desired results when I call
getElementById, it otherwise seems to handle the document identically to
the way Firefox does:
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2007/04/10/test.py
- Sam Ruby
On 4/10/07, Simon Pieters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or allow any attribute that starts with x_ or something (to prevent
clashing with future revisions of HTML), as private attributes.
Instead of starts with x_, how about contains a colon?
A conformance checker could ensure that there is a
On 4/10/07, Anne van Kesteren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 20:21:27 +0200, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Or allow any attribute that starts with x_ or something (to prevent
clashing with future revisions of HTML), as private attributes.
Instead of starts with x_, how
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:41:12 +0200, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
How so?
I missed the part where you wanted to change existing HTML parsers. I
thought Hixie pointed out earlier (by means of examples) why we can't
have namespace parsing in HTML. I suppose we can
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Apr 10, 2007, at 2:14 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:41:12 +0200, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
How so?
I missed the part where you wanted to change existing HTML parsers. I
thought Hixie pointed out earlier (by means
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Sam Ruby wrote:
People often code things like the following:
pre
one
two
three
/pre
Visually, this ends up looking something like
+---+
| |
| one |
| two |
| three |
+---+
with the following CSS rule:
pre { border: solid 1px #000
.
- Sam Ruby
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 00:29:03 +0100, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If there is no interest in standardizing a serialization (or separate
standard serializations form HTML5 and XHTML5), then this discussion
belongs on [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
http
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Dec 10, 2006, at 02:09, Sam Ruby wrote:
I am asking whether there is interest in identifying ONE standard
serialization that everybody who wishes to comply with could do so.
Why? For digital signatures? For comparing parse trees from different
parsers?
My train
elements are in the DOM. Not as an opaque blob, but as a set of
scriptable and stylable elements. Take a look at the following:
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/SVG_In_HTML_Introduction
- Sam Ruby
Karl Dubost wrote:
Sam,
Le 6 déc. 2006 à 23:13, Sam Ruby a écrit :
My original interest was to write a replacement for Python's SGMLLIB,
i.e., one that was not based on the theoretical ideal of how SGML
vocabularies work, but one based on the practical notion of how HTML
actually is parsed
an example:
http://scott.userland.com/2005/11/09.html
- Sam Ruby
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
Independent of what the specs say *MUST* happen, I'd like people to
bring up one or more browsers with a URL from this list, and see if the
browser asked them if they wanted to subscribe. Subscribe is not a
normal feature associated
://feedvalidator.org/testcases/
http://feedparser.org/tests/
My goal would be to produce something that I could use within the
feedparser (and therefore, planet).
- Sam Ruby
reasons.
+1, though I would suggest a one change:
159: 376 // Yuml;
- Sam Ruby
Robert Sayre wrote:
On 12/5/06, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a request. It would be nice if the sniffing algorithm made an
exception for text/plain.
It would be nice, but
Use case:
http://svn.smedbergs.us/wordpress-atom10/tags/0.6/wp-atom10-comments.php
Fixed in FF 2.0.0.1
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
xmlns attributes are invalid on HTML elements except html, and
when found on unrecognized [elements] imply style=display:none
unless you recognize the value of this attribute.
There are millions of documents that would be broken
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
The common pattern that I see is that xmlns=.
It's certainly the more common value, but it is by no means the only one,
as you will see if you examine the various examples I gave in more detail.
My bad. Point made.
- Sam Ruby
work, you are hardly
representative of the majority of Web authors, which is who I have to
primarily take into account when it comes to the spec.
Agreed.
- Sam Ruby
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
Case in point:
http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2006/12/01/The-White-Pebble
In IE, there's some stray XHTML HTML and XHTML HTML XML text. This
isn't acceptable to most people. It certainly isn't something that it
would make sense
.
All I ask is that you keep an open mind while we collectively explore
whether there are extremely selective and surgical changes that can be
made to html5 -- like the change to allow empty element syntax only on a
handful of elements.
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
The question
if the internal-data-model to HTML5 conversion is
lossless. If it is not, people will find ways with structured comments
or by creating intentionally invalid HTML5 and relying on the error
recovery that is either prescribed or observed to be commonly practiced.
- Sam Ruby
on this information, but that's outside of the control of the
parser. IMHO, the parser itself shouldn't complain when it finds a
HTML4 DOCTYPE, or an XHTML2 DOCTYPE for that matter.
Of course, a lot more HTML4 documents would be valid HTML5 than XHTML 2
documents.
- Sam Ruby
In the hopes that it will bring focus to this discussion:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HtmlVsXhtml
- Sam Ruby
/cafeaulaitA/
- Sam Ruby
produced by the script in the following HTML5 document?
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2006/12/02/whatwg.logo
Any takers?
- Sam Ruby
P.S. That script, complete with indentation and readable variable
names, is still an order of magnitude smaller than
http://whatwg.org/images/logo
unresolved issues that
need to be worked?
- Sam Ruby
On 12/2/06, David Hyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shipping Safari has no SVG support. WebKit nightlies do. That's the
only reason the logo now renders correctly in the nightlies so
that particular file is completely irrelevant to this discussion.
I'm confused. Which file? And why is it
On 12/2/06, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 2, 2006, at 18:24, Sam Ruby wrote:
It would not be wise for HTML5 to limit itself to the more constrained
character set of XML. In particular, the form feed character is
pretty popular,
BTW, I copy and pasted the wrong table
portions of this discussion framed in terms that border on the
discussions of epic battles with Zeldman.
- Sam Ruby
On 11/30/06, Michel Fortin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We can't really have a document that is both HTML5 and XHTML5 at the
same time if we keep the !DOCTYPE HTML declaration however.
Why not?
- Sam Ruby
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 16:20 -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
I believe that I could modify my weblog to be simultaneously both
HTML5 and XHTML5 compliant, modulo the embedded SVG content, something
that would needs to be discussed separately.
I think having /two/ different
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
In HTML5, there are a number of elements with a content model of
empty: area, base, br, col, command, embed, hr, img, link, meta, and
param.
If HTML5 were changed so that these elements -- and these elements
alone -- permitted an optional trailing slash
a DOM, from which a correct serialization can
take place.
Now, what type of parser would you use? HTML5's rules come
tantalizingly close to handling this situation, except for a few cases
involving tags that are self-closing...
- Sam Ruby
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
What do you mean with implemented interoperably?
produce the same DOM
- Sam Ruby
.
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://intertwingly.net/blog/2006/11/28/Meet-the-New-Boss
[2] http://intertwingly.net/blog/2006/11/28/Meet-the-New-Boss#c1164743684
[3] http://intertwingly.net/blog/2006/11/24/Feedback-on-XHTML#c1164720800
88 matches
Mail list logo
