error in RFC 2396 example

Roy T. Fielding (
Thu, 25 Mar 1999 17:42:27 -0800

To: uri@Bunyip.Com
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 17:42:27 -0800
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <>
Message-ID:  <>
Subject: error in RFC 2396 example

Something to remember for the next time it is revised.


------- Forwarded Message

From: Miles Sabin <>
To: "''" <>
Subject: Typo in RFC 2396?
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:30:38 -0000


I've been working through the relative URI resolution
mechanism in RFC 2396, and I've spotted something which 
seems a little odd. The example resolution on p.29 for,




is given as,


but as far as I can make out, the resolution algorithm
suggests the result ought to be,


which is the result that was given in RFC 1808. It's
also the result that both Netscape 4 and IE 4 deliver.

Given that this would be an observable change in
behaviour between the two RFCs, I'm a little surprised 
that it wasn't flagged up as such if the change really 
was intended ...

Strangely enough, Sun's badly broken class 
_does_ give the result specified in 2396, which makes me 
suspect that something must be wrong ;-)



Miles Sabin                          Cromwell Media
Internet Systems Architect           5/6 Glenthorne Mews
+44 (0)181 410 2230                  London, W6 0LJ           England

------- End of Forwarded Message