W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > July 2003

Re: Proposal: new top level domain '.urn' alleviates all need for urn: URIs

From: Clive D.W. Feather <clive@demon.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 21:27:06 +0100
To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
Cc: hardie@qualcomm.com, uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <20030709202706.GI8082@finch-staff-1.thus.net>

Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com said:
> Er. Right. Like I said, the 's' in https: is a processing
> instruction that results in different behavior from the server.
> One can denote the same resource with an http: URI, an
> https: URI, a urn: URI, an ftp: URN, etc. and insofar
> as the denotation is concerned, those URIs are opaque.
> However, http: and https: URIs have IMO a special relation
> in that whereas other lexical distinctions between two
> URIs might correspond to a difference in denotation, alternation
> between the http: and https: schemes for the otherwise
> lexically equivalent URIs cannot and does not result
> in any difference in denotation.
> Any URI https://X denotes the very same resource as
> the URI http://X,

This is complete and utter rubbish.

I have set up web sites where http://X and https://X, for the same X, have
resulted in completely different pages that then do different things.

In fact, the equivalence was between https://X/Y and http://X/Itrustyou/Y

Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive@demon.net>   | Tel:    +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive@davros.org>  | *** NOTE CHANGE ***
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Fax:    +44 870 051 9937
Thus plc            |                            | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2003 16:27:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:06 UTC