Re: Proposition on advanced URL features (Request for comments)

Paul Burchard (burchard@CS.Princeton.EDU)
Tue, 28 Nov 95 12:25:43 -0500


Message-Id: <9511281725.AA03285@cs>
From: Paul Burchard <burchard@CS.Princeton.EDU>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 12:25:43 -0500
To: James Whitescarver <jim@eies.njit.edu>
Subject: Re: Proposition on advanced URL features (Request for comments)
Cc: tm@rasips1.rasip.etf.hr, uri@bunyip.com, www-talk@w3.org

James Whitescarver <jim@eies.njit.edu> writes:
> 1.  The use of ## for special anchors seems reasonable.

You mean "##H", "##P", "##/", etc., according to what was proposed.  
 This seems like a very ad hoc type declaration scheme.

> 6.  If there are browser or server implimentor looking to
> add "selection" anchors we should define the
> conventions.  Most current browsers, as far as I know, do
> not send the #anchorName in the HTTP GET or POST and will
> not, therefor, work as is with selection anchors.

That's good -- they should never be set to the server.  Although  
the URI spec is not fully clear on this point, I would strongly  
object to muddying the current stable distinction between "?" as a  
server-side resource specializer, and "#" as a client-side resource  
specializer.

Netscape is also proposing to make use of URL paramters (";" stuff)  
for server-side byte-range extraction, which seems like a good  
idea.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Burchard	<burchard@cs.princeton.edu>
``I'm still learning how to count backwards from infinity...''
--------------------------------------------------------------------