W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > January 2003

Re: argument from authority considered pointless

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:49:55 -0500
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <r01050400-1023-3517E5422E6411D7AFB80003937A08C2@[]>

tbray@textuality.com (Tim Bray) writes:
>So at the moment I'm just not convinced that it's fruitful to start to 
>write extra rules along the lines of "http:-class URIs must be used to 
>identify things of type yyy" - de facto they're being used as 
>identifiers for the weirdest stuff imaginable and in ways that span the 
>whole spectrum of human creativity, and I just don't see the upside in 
>trying to build fences.  -Tim

There is no need for "extra rules".  The fences are already plainly
specified in RFC 2616:

>3.2.2 http URL
>The "http" scheme is used to locate network resources via the HTTP
>protocol. This section defines the scheme-specific syntax and
>semantics for http URLs.
>http_URL = "http:" "//" host [ ":" port ] [ abs_path [ "?" query ]]
> If the port is empty or not given, port 80 is assumed. The semantics
>are that the identified resource is located at the server listening
>for TCP connections on that port of that host, and the Request-URI
>for the resource is abs_path (section 5.1.2)....

HTTP resources are critters that live on HTTP servers.  Seems pretty
plain, even boringly well-worn.  Seems to work very well, too.

Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:49:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:36 UTC