Re: [URN] Re: The UR* scheme registry, Citing URL/URI specs

Klaus Weide (kweide@tezcat.com)
Fri, 24 Oct 1997 18:32:35 -0500 (CDT)


Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 18:32:35 -0500 (CDT)
From: Klaus Weide <kweide@tezcat.com>
To: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
cc: uri@bunyip.com
Subject: Re: [URN] Re: The UR* scheme registry, Citing URL/URI specs
In-Reply-To: <199710242207.SAA06155@access1.digex.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95.971024182456.7477U-100000@huitzilo.tezcat.com>

On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, Al Gilman wrote:

> [response 1 -- fragments as we know them]
> 
> The general URL syntax draft wisely avoids trying to give a
> uniform concept or specfication for the the interpretation of
> #fragment substrings in URL references.
> 
> Note that the "fragment" in this syntax symbol should therefore
> be read as "this fragment of the textual URL-reference," not "the
> cited fragment of the referenced resource" even though in the
> common case of http: URLs referring to HTML documents either
> interpretation fits.

Can you explain what you mean with that last paragraph?
I don't understand the distinction you are trying to make here,
or why the two sentences are connected by "therefore".

    Klaus