- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:47:34 +1000
- To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Now: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/451 On 20/04/2013, at 2:07 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > P1 sections 2.7.1 and 2.7.2 define the HTTP and HTTPS URI schemes without fragment identifiers. > > While it's true that HTTP sends these URIs without fragids "on the wire" in the request-target, the schemes *do* allow fragids pretty much everywhere else they're used (including some places in HTTP, e.g., the Location header). > > Given that this is going to be the definition for these URI schemes, and we already require that the fragid be omitted in the request-target, shouldn't the syntax allow a fragment identifier? > > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 22 April 2013 03:48:00 UTC