W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-iri@w3.org > February 2004

Http and RFC-2396

From: Michel Suignard <michelsu@windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 19:22:19 -0800
Message-ID: <84DD35E3DD87D5489AC42A59926DABE905E05DC5@WIN-MSG-10.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
To: <uri@w3.org>
Cc: <public-iri@w3.org>

>-----Original Message-----
>From: public-iri-request@w3.org [mailto:public-iri-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Adam M. Costello BOGUS >address, see signature
>
>
>Also, since http://jos%C3%A9.net/ violates RFC-2396, it's hard to
predict
> how applications will react.  Some might reject it, some might pass
jos%C3%A9.net
> literally to their host name resolver,...

In which way does it violate RFC-2396? Could you point to the relevant
text? I would agree that it was not the intent to allow it as you would
expect the http scheme to use the 'server' notation, not the 'reg_name'.
But 'authority' contains both 'server' and 'reg_name'. I was trying to
find some prose in RFC-2396 that would restrict the http scheme, but
couldn't find it.

On the same thread, is there somewhere a formal up-to-date definition in
ABNF for current URI schemes, such as http, mailto, ftp, etc...?

Otherwise Adam's mail was very useful for my understanding of the
issues.

Michel Suignard
Received on Monday, 16 February 2004 22:23:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:15:12 UTC