Bug#172436: [PROPOSAL] web browser url viewing
On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 09:08:30PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Here is a patch based heavily on Joey's original patch that describes
> that. This patch (similar to Joey's) doesn't include the URL
> canonicalization requirements of the secure BROWSER specification. They
> don't seem obviously necessary to me and are complex and would add a lot
> of additional wording to explain how to canonicalize URLs.
>
> Comments? Seconds?
Solely for being better specified, I think either this or the
Compatible definition is preferable to the ESR original. I
never use BROWSER myself, so I'm hesitant to weigh in on the
other aspects.
Reply to: