Re: p1: HTTP(S) URIs and fragment identifiers

• From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
• Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 09:28:34 +0200
• To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
• CC: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <517243A2.9000006@gmx.de>

On 2013-04-20 06:07, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> P1 sections 2.7.1 and 2.7.2 define the HTTP and HTTPS URI schemes without fragment identifiers.
>
> While it's true that HTTP sends these URIs without fragids "on the wire" in the request-target, the schemes *do* allow fragids pretty much everywhere else they're used (including some places in HTTP, e.g., the Location header).
>
> Given that this is going to be the definition for these URI schemes, and we already require that the fragid be omitted in the request-target, shouldn't the syntax allow a fragment identifier?

No.

Fragment identifiers are allowed for *any* URI scheme; the scheme 
definition doesn't need to include it.

Best regards, Julian

Received on Saturday, 20 April 2013 07:29:05 UTC