W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1997

Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP

From: Hallam-Baker <hallam@ai.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 18:43:06 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199705062243.SAA21876@muesli.ai.mit.edu>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Cc: josh@netscape.com, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3226

>           draft-fielding-url-syntax-05.txt
> is about to go to last call. 

Where? Is there a mailing list?

> I believe that redirection on things that turn out to be
> directories is inevitable. That is, if "/dir1/dir2/name" is
> actually a directory, the official URL should be
> "ftp://host/dir1/dir2/name/" but that if an HTTP
> proxy chooses to honor "ftp://host/dir1/dir2/name",
> it might as well honor it by generating a redirect as
> by generating content with different URLs. But in some
> ways, it's completely outside the standard: both ways work.

Why not process the message as normal but send the client a
URI field to give the canonical uri?

One comment on the draft. In view of current litigation going
on it might be worth someone with legal training casting an eye
over the draft. In particular to check whether the idea that
a URL is a pure reference, a statement of fact and hence 
uncopyrightable in itself is brought out.

Received on Tuesday, 6 May 1997 15:45:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:20 UTC