Re: [Uri-review] ws: and wss: schemes

I wonder if the "HTTP Uber Alles" crowd, if they were active 20 years 
ago, would be insisting that everything, including that newfangled 
HTTP protocol, be expressed in the form of a Gopher address, or 
perhaps FTP or Telnet, or maybe an e-mail address with the standard, 
adopted by the owner of the address, that the subject line contain 
the actual protocol intended to be used?

I also wonder if, should their side win all its battles, 1000 years 
from now all URIs in use will be at least 1000 characters long, of 
which at least 800 of these characters will be fossilized deadwood of 
obsolete protocols that are preserved as magic incantations to begin 
a URI.  So they'll be something like:

http://ipp.solarsystem.net/earth/galacticgateway.net/andromeda/tachyon
.protocol.net/ ...[snip]... /actualsite.actualgalaxy/path-in-site

where "ipp.solarsystem.net", under "http", is the magic indicator of 
the InterPlanetaryProtocol that became dominant in 2067, and was 
followed by the actual address being reached by that protocol, 
starting with its home planet, but then "galacticgateway.net" within 
"earth" became the magic string to indicate that you are actually 
using the InterGalacticProtocol which became dominant in 2152, and 
similarly the "tachyon.protocol.net" signifies the Tachyon Protocol 
that caught on around 2272.

User agent identifiers for the browsers people use with their 31st 
century protocols are similarly long and convoluted, beginning with 
"Mozilla/5.0" and containing references to MSIE, Gecko, and various 
other browser names and codenames that were trendy at some point or 
other over the millennium.

-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

Received on Wednesday, 9 September 2009 13:01:28 UTC