在 2017年04月17日 21:39, Anne van Kesteren 写道:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 3:32 PM, duanyao <duan...@ustc.edu> wrote:
So you mean file: protocol is not portable? For absolute file: url, true;
for relative url, almost not true.
When writing web pages, no one use absolute file: urls in practice, so this
is a non-issue.
Neither is portable or part of the web, since you don't allocate
resources on someone else their machine that way. (And even in the
sense that you mean it, they're not portable due to the different
styles of matching, case-insensitive, Unicode normalization, custom
variants of Unicode normalization, bytes vs code points, etc.)
When we want to write a web application portable across multiple server
OSes, these issues could
happen too. The rules of thumb are (1) assume case-sensitive but don't
create file names which differ
only in casing. (2) avoid characters subject to unicode normalization in
file names.
I think "portable" is never absolute. There are always incompatibilities
between browsers, and even
once standardized feature can be deprecated/removed in future, e.g.
`window.showModalDialog()`,
`<applet>` and `<keygen>`.
