On Nov 3, 2014, at 15:32 , Anne van Kesteren <ann...@annevk.nl> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, David Singer <sin...@apple.com> wrote: >> The readability is much better (I am not a fan of the current trend of >> writing specifications in pseudo-basic, which makes life easier for >> implementers and terrible for anyone else, including authors), and I also >> think that an approach that doesn’t obsolete RFC 3986 is attractive. > > Is Apple interested in changing its URL infrastructure to not be > fundamentally incompatible with RFC 3986 then? I was expressing a personal opinion on readability, and on living in a larger community, not an Apple position. > > Other than slightly different eventual data models for URLs, which we > could maybe amend RFC 3986 for IETF gods willing, I think the main > problem is that a URL that goes through an RFC 3986 pipeline cannot go > through a URL pipeline. E.g. parsing "../test" against > "foobar://test/x" gives wildly different results. That is not a state > we want to be in, so something has to give. Agreed, we have to work out the differences. David Singer Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.