Re: Vetting rules for UR* schemes

Roy T. Fielding (fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU)
Sat, 25 Nov 1995 02:09:15 -0800 

To: Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no
Cc: uri@bunyip.com, klensin@mail1.reston.mci.net
Subject: Re: Vetting rules for UR* schemes 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 24 Nov 1995 11:41:16 +0100."
             <9511241041.AA20837@mocha.bunyip.com> 
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 02:09:15 -0800
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Message-Id:  <9511250209.aa06921@paris.ics.uci.edu>

One thing missing:

   Does the scheme intend to be used in relative forms?
   If so, can it be parsed using the generic-RL BNF of RFC 1808
      and retain the correct semantics?

Actually, I think the latter should be a requirement of any hierarchical
scheme, even if it isn't intended to be relative.

 ...Roy T. Fielding
    Department of Information & Computer Science    (fielding@ics.uci.edu)
    University of California, Irvine, CA 92717-3425    fax:+1(714)824-4056
    http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/