-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
"Absolutize" has no defined meaning in relation to URL. #1150
Comments
Is it truly necessary to define every word used? What can one possibly mean by absolutize in the context of URLs that doesn't mean resolve a relative URI into an absolute URI, and why is it necessary to add a definition for such an obvious and only reasonable interpretation? |
@skynavga No. In this case, it is in fact misleading (and unnecessary) to invent a new word (absolutize) since the normative reference already provides an unambiguous hook: resolving a reference as defined in RFC 3986 |
@palemieux well, I can't claim to have invented it, since there are so many references to "absolutize URL" that one can find online, such as here and also here from 2002, and again here from 2009, etc |
I never suggested you did, only that TTML2 should not use it :) |
Define and reference inline term absolutize (#1150).
Originally posted by @palemieux in https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/pull/1054/files
The term "absolutizing" is used 9 times in TTML2 - this should be editorially fixed for clarity.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: