Thanks for coding this, Ben!

For anyone interested, here's the tracker item on JoomlaCode:
http://joomlacode.org/gf/project/joomla/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=30587

@bentasker If you'll update this to master, I'll merge it. Thanks sorry this took so long.

@bentasker can you update?

@elinw

Hi,

Sorry only just seen this! I can update yes, may not be for a few days though as I'm about to start my next shift-block. Will update to master as soon as I get a spare minute.

Matt - possibly but I've had no end of issues with PRU's on my (admittedly,
ancient) build of Chromium. My view (others may differ) is that they just
don't work well enough to be in the core.

On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 9:45 PM, Matt Thomas notifications@github.comwrote:

Is this something that can be resolved using protocol relative URLs (
http://www.paulirish.com/2010/the-protocol-relative-url/) instead?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub#994 (comment)
.

Ben Tasker
http://www.bentasker.co.uk

One Server to rule them all,
One Ping to Find Them,
One LAN to bring them all,
And in the darkness BIND them.

01001001 01100110 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100011
01100001 01101110 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000
01110100 01101000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101
00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100001 01110011 00100000
01110011 01100001 01100100 00100000 01100001 01110011 00100000 01001001
00100000 01100001 01101101

@bentasker Thanks. I had actually retracted my earlier comment, via GitHub, as using protocol relative URLs are probaby not the best application for this specific method. I've personally had nothing but success with them, but at the same time, I can see where we may need the absolute protocol available in this method.