- From: <hallam@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Feb 96 19:36:58 -0500
- To: Mike Meyer <mwm@contessa.phone.net>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
- Cc: hallam@w3.org
>Now, could someone explain what application this would be used for? >Are servers expected to create multipart objects when handed a URL? >Browsers expected to ask for a bunch in a row? A shorthand for mirror >systems? Yes eventually, Yes eventually, Yes! Also, assertion exchange, annotations, server configuration... I think there are any number of occassions where refering to sets of URIs will be very usefull. Some times there will be more work that is justified than others. I beleive that regardless of the application many of these will end up being entered either by hand or generated with drag 'n drop type tools. Thus I favour the structural over the syntactic approach. Note one trick that VMS allows and UNIX fails on :- rename *.jpeg *.jpg The value from wildcard #1 is used as the replacement key in wildcard #2. This trick does not extend to well, multiple *s become difficult. But it is a very usefull facility that when I ask UNIX appologists how to do it they tend to 1) try to explain why I should not want to be able to do that 2) extol the virtues of full regular expressions, or 3) unearth a 2453 line perl script which reads a directory then produces a csh script which performs the renaming operation. Point is that making the matching facility too complex may be counter productive. I'm in favour of very simple systems which behave as expected. Phill PS Please don't send me your perl scripts.
Received on Friday, 23 February 1996 16:39:04 UTC