31980 - should accept http:\\ as well as http://

Status: VERIFIED WONTFIX

(Core :: Networking, defect, P3)

Description

[Erik van der Poel]

Try accessing the following site using Nav4 and IE5. Nav4 doesn't
"work", but IE5 does:

  http://www.sideymun.co.uk/

This is because IE5 is lenient, and accepts the double backslash \\
right after the http: even though it ought to be //.

As usual, my opinion is that we should be compatible with the market
leader (IE5). My suggestion is to change Mozilla so that it accepts \\
too. If Mozilla doesn't make this change, ordinary people will think
that Mozilla is broken, not IE5, and not the site.

[I'm not subscribed to mozilla-netlib.]

Erik


     Subject: 
            Problem with specific www site
  Resent-Date: 
            Wed, 15 Mar 2000 10:45:31 -0800 (PST)
 Resent-From: 
            [e-mail]
        Date: 
            Wed, 15 Mar 2000 18:44:42 -0000
       From: 
            "David Illsley" <[e-mail]>
 Organization: 
            Another Netscape Collabra Server User
         To: 
            [e-mail]
  Newsgroups: 
            netscape.public.mozilla.seamonkey



Hi there, don't know if this is the right place to ask, but I would like
someone to check if there is a problem with M14, or if it is just me.

I am having pronlems accessing www.sideymun.co.uk and www.sideymun.f9.co.uk
The second URL is a mirror, and it doesn't work either. I keep getting an
error suggesting that it is trying to connect to %5c%5cwww.sideymun.f9.co.uk

Anyway, this just seems really wierd, and although I have tested it from 2
separate installations, it still seems unlikely.

The site works fine in other browser, what is happening

Comment 1

[Warren Harris]

Ugh. I hate the fact that we so botched url parsing in the old browser, and 
microsoft copied our crap. Now the whole world makes use of our mistakes and 
we're going to be paying for it until the end of time. 

Personally, I'd say WONTFIX, but I'll leave it up to Andreas.

Comment 2

[Daniel Veditz [:dveditz]]

CC'ing rickg -- he's got similar layout bugs about whether we should alert 
users to illegal/malformed tags or just silently fail to render. or "do the 
right thing" when we know what was meant.

Comment 3

[Judson Valeski]

agreed. I say WONTFIX.

Comment 4

[Andreas Otte]

Same thing here. There is a line to accept malformed URLs and this one crosses
it. 

Comment 5

[Tom Everingham]

verified WONTFIX