- From: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 09:17:40 +1300
- To: Roland Zink <roland@zinks.de>
- Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
We see ftp:// all the time As for using a character or 2 for the method. Why? What is wrong with numbers? 1 = GET 2 = HEAD 3 = POST etc. Sent from my iPad On 2/02/2013, at 6:26, Roland Zink <roland@zinks.de> wrote: > On 01.02.2013 16:56, Nico Williams wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:43 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Feb 1, 2013 1:50 AM, "Amos Jeffries" <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote: >>>> This makes several assumptions which are false and will cause a lot of >>>> trouble: >>>> 1) scheme of URI is always http(s)://. >>> Yes, it does make this assumption. It seems, rather safe to me. What other >>> schemes do we need to support? >> I don't think that's a safe assumption at all. I've heard of other >> schemes used in production systems (in enterprises, granted, but so >> what, the same might be useful in the Internet). >> >> Nico > > The scheme which comes to my mind is ftp. As far as I know this is supported by browsers and there are proxies translating between HTTP and FTP. > >
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 20:18:06 UTC