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 (e.g.
javascript would be problematic). Convincing implementers that it's
worth implementing might be trickier.)
How should it change?
Not sure what you're referring to.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-uri-scheme-reg-04
I just gave you one, "%"... E.g. "http://example.org/?%"; does not have
an RFC 3986 representation.
Here's the output of a URL parser (the one I chose was Firefox):
new URL("http://example.com/?%";).search
"?%"
Here's the output of a URI parser:
$ ruby -r addressable/uri -e "p
Addressable::URI.parse('http://example.org/?%').query"
"%"
I also assert that such a URL round-trips a URL parse/serialize sequence.
- Sam Ruby
