W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2009

RE: ISSUE-60: Name of draft should be changed to refer to URI's not URL's

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 08:39:40 -0700
To: John Kemp <john.kemp@nokia.com>, "ext noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
CC: "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8B62A039C620904E92F1233570534C9B0118CD5B4010@nambx04.corp.adobe.com>
> 'Designers of URIs have traditionally used ?  to encode server-side   
> parameters' - what do 'server-side parameters' actually mean in the  
> context of URNs (or non-HTTP URIs even)? Do they have meaning always?  
> Does the document describe uses _beyond_  the use of ? as HTTP query  
> parameters?


Good point. For example, in "mailto:" URIs, the query parameters
after ? are usually processed "client side". 


> 'At its inception, the Web also introduced fragment identifiers  
> (preceded by # ) as a means of addressing specific locations in a  
> document.' - again, how does this apply in situations where a URI does  
> not specify a retrieval algorithm?

Generally, "#" URIs are used with for file:, ftp:, http:, https:.
I don't know if they're used with any other URI scheme.
(imap:?)

> 'Create URIs for intermediate pages in a Web application so that the  
> back button does the right thing' mean, when the client is not a Web  
> browser (or even an HTTP user-agent)?

I don't think it's a useful statement, since "Web application"
really is only used with "http:" currently; not sure what the
widgets spec says.


> All of the examples given appear to use http: URIs. My sense is that  
> this draft is currently talking mostly, and perhaps exclusively, about  
> http: URIs, usually accessed within a Web browser context.

> My suggestion is simply that the document ought to say exactly that (I  
> think it's useful even if it does only talk about http: URIs), unless  
> relevant use-cases beyond http: URIs can be elaborated in the  
> document, and the language changed appropriately.

+1
Received on Friday, 3 April 2009 15:40:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:13 GMT