- From: Adam M. Costello BOGUS address, see signature <BOGUS@BOGUS.nicemice.net>
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 04:51:03 +0000
- To: uri@w3.org, public-iri@w3.org
Michel Suignard <michelsu@windows.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > Also, since http://jos%C3%A9.net/ violates RFC-2396,
>
> In which way does it violate RFC-2396? Could you point to the relevant
> text?
Sorry, I said that wrong. It violates RFC-2616 (HTTP), specifically the
parts of RFC-2616 that are incorporated by reference from RFC-2396.
RFC-2616:
3.2.1 General Syntax
For definitive information on URL syntax and semantics, see "Uniform
Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax and Semantics,"
RFC 2396... This specification adopts the definitions of ...
"host", ... from that specification.
3.2.2 http URL
http_URL = "http:" "//" host [ ":" port ] [ abs_path [ "?" query ]]
RFC-2396:
A. Collected BNF for URI
host = hostname | IPv4address
hostname = *( domainlabel "." ) toplabel [ "." ]
domainlabel = alphanum | alphanum *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum
toplabel = alpha | alpha *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum
IPv4address = 1*digit "." 1*digit "." 1*digit "." 1*digit
> On the same thread, is there somewhere a formal up-to-date definition
> in ABNF for current URI schemes, such as http, mailto, ftp, etc...?
http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes
Each scheme is defined in its own document, except for the ones that
haven't been updated since RFC-1738.
AMC
http://www.nicemice.net/amc/
Received on Monday, 16 February 2004 23:51:04 UTC