W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > November 2001

RE: RFC2518 (WebDAV) / RFC2396 (URI) inconsistency

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:25:17 +0200
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B160AF3@trebe006.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: fielding@eBuilt.com, ejw@cse.ucsc.edu
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, uri@w3.org
> > So, you could still have "http:" and two additional 
> URI/URL/URNs for the
> > version-specific definitions of the http URL space.
> Yes, but only if we defined it to be such a thing, which we 
> won't do because
> Web browsers still discard the scheme name if it is the same 
> as the scheme
> of the referring document.

What makes you think that web browsers are the only (or
even primary) agents utilizing a "scheme:" URI approach?

And what's to say that web browsers should be discarding
the scheme?

Received on Thursday, 29 November 2001 07:25:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:19:02 UTC