On 10/14/2014 04:57 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
Given all of the above, would you suggest changing the spec or the expected
test results?
You said "The expected results are an object that returns the original
href, but empty values for all other properties. I don't see this
behavior in the spec" but that is how the API works (more or less,
protocol would return ":").
You'd have to explain in a little more detail what you think is wrong
before I can answer this.
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 are inconsistent.
To illustrate, try pasting http://f:b/c into:
http://www.lookout.net/test/url/url-liveview.html
Relevant excerpt from that page:
var url = new URL(input, base);
urlHref.textContent = url.href;
And the results for http://f:b/c after applying urltestparser.js against
urltestdata.js is as follows:
{"input":"http://f:b/c","base":"http://example.org/foo/bar","scheme
":"","username":"","password":null,"host":"","port":"","path":"","query":"","fra
gment":"","href":"http://f:b/c","protocol":":","search":"","hash":""}
Looking at the first of those
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2014/10/13/urltest-results/eb3950fcc8
it seems something might be broken here on your end.
Can you explain what you think is broken? It isn't completely obvious, but
the input string in that case contains U+200B, U+2060, U+FEFF:
Sure, but 1) per IDNA those are ignored, and 2) urltestdata.txt does
not contain the output you have for "whatwg".
Perhaps until the inconsistencies are resolved, I shouldn't label
anything whatwg. Meanwhile, the testdata results are listed in rows
marked "testdata".
I'll look further into why the results provided by Opera and
https://rubygems.org/gems/addressable don't appear to match RFC 3491.
- Sam Ruby
