I really think it's a mistake to require the URI for http-request to be an http: or https: URI. There are lots of (unfortunately non-standard) URI schemes out there that are really just http with a different scheme name, e.g., ical: I don't see any reason why an implementation should be forbidden from understanding other schemes. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Everything should be made as simple as http://nwalsh.com/ | possible, but no simpler.Received on Monday, 8 October 2007 14:05:32 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:42 GMT