Re: fragment syntax

Al Gilman (asgilman@access.digex.net)
Mon, 27 Oct 1997 22:57:35 -0500 (EST)


From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
Message-Id: <199710280357.WAA10614@access4.digex.net>
Subject: Re: fragment syntax
To: fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu (Roy T. Fielding)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 22:57:35 -0500 (EST)
Cc: uri@bunyip.com
In-Reply-To:  <9710271923.aa06613@paris.ics.uci.edu> from "Roy T. Fielding" at "Oct 27, 97 07:17:34 pm"

to follow up on what Roy T. Fielding said:
> To: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>

> >I still have hopes to see this kind of intra-resource reference
> >refinement strengthened in the URI vocabulary of the 'Net.
> >
> >See for example my flame about "Where-it-says in URLs" at
> >
> >  http://www.access.digex.net/%7Easgilman/web-access/wis_rfc.html
> 
> This is another one of those oft-repeated discussions that never
> actually leads to implementations.  For example,
> 
>    http://www.acl.lanl.gov/URI/archive/uri-95q4.messages/0111.html
> ...
> From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>

> We have discussed this same topic many times on the www-talk and uri
> lists, and the conclusion is always the same:
> 
> 
>    3) the "=" character should be used as an indicator for a non-name
>       syntax, as in
> 
>           #name        (as in current HTML use)
>           #id=fred

1.  Lynx will process the simple form for both name and id i.e.

            #name
            #id

because they are guaranteed never to duplicate.  Seems like the
right way to go.  

2.  None of the other forms mentioned do a "where-it-says," i.e. 
match a string.

>           #bytes=200-254
>           #words=20-24
>           #line=4
>           #chapter=14
>           #page=3
> 

But, the belling-the-cat question is still who would implement it.

-- Al Gilman