Re: Vetting rules for UR* schemes

Roy T. Fielding (fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU)
Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:45:36 -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 "Sun, 26 Nov 1995 23:30:11 +0100."
             <199511262230.XAA07978@dale.uninett.no> 
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:45:36 -0800
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Message-Id:  <9511281945.aa24567@paris.ics.uci.edu>

> here's what I added.
> Do you think it is clear enough?
> 
>     Harald
> 
> <h2>Is it relative-URL compatible?</h2>
> Many applications know and love relative URLs. Therefore, the
> following questions must be asked:
> <ul>
>   <li> Can it be parsed according to RFC 1808 - that is, if the tokens
>        "//", "/", ";", "?" and "#" are used, do they have the meaning
>        given in RFC 1808?
>   <li> Does it make sense to use it in relative URLs like those RFC
>        1808 specifies?

The above is quite clear.  I don't understand this last one:

>   <li> Are there ways of using pieces of the information inside it
>        that implementations are supposed to get right?

....Roy