- From: Robert Brewer <fumanchu@aminus.org>
- Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 10:58:15 -0800
- To: "Vincent Murphy" <vdm@vdm.ie>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Vincent Murphy wrote: > During a discussion [0] about why Youtube uses ?feature=related in its > URIs, I observed that the Referer header URI, if it included a > fragment identifier, could be used identify the anchor used to > initiate a GET. This would be useful for > > - analysing anchor popularity, > - eliminating the need for workarounds and hacks like Youtube ? > feature=related > - encourage cleaner, canonical URIs. > > I did a search of discussions around the HTTP protocol, but was not > able to find the origin of the statement from RFC2616 Section 14.32 > [1], paraphrased in the subject of this message. This statement is > also in draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-05, section 10.6 [2]. > > I seek links to the discussion or rationale and origin of this > statement, or failing that, comments about how allowing fragment > identifiers in Referer URIs would enhance or violate web architecture. One such would be http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Fragment Robert Brewer fumanchu@aminus.org
Received on Saturday, 14 February 2009 18:58:50 UTC