[10300] in www-talk@info.cern.ch
Re: Extended URL for frames
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Larry Masinter)
Fri Sep 13 02:53:40 1996
To: davidp@earthlink.net
Cc: www-talk@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <199609130020.RAA19949@spain.it.earthlink.net>
(davidp@earthlink.net)
From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 23:41:00 PDT
Resent-From: www-talk@w3.org
> Any comments?
I it's ugly. I don't like it. Here are some reasons:
I think there's a security risk:
company A has some pages, with frames
site X has some obnoxious pages
hacker Y creates a funny link, that insert's some of
X's pages into A's frame.
user U clicks on Y's link, sees a URL that
looks like it comes from company A but has
X pages in the middle.
Fragment specifiers are supposed to point to something that is a
'part' of the resource identified, not some local construction made up
of lots of pieces around it.
If, on the other hand, you want to put frames into bookmarks, there's
no reason why the bookmark entry has to just be a URL.
Larry
