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

Re: #foo URI references

From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 10:42:46 -0500
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20030922104139.01688d10@172.27.10.30>
To: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>
Cc: uri@w3.org

At 19:08 2003 09 20 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
>Roy T. Fielding scripsit:
>
>> >The semantic change is to extend #foo semantics to BASE#foo 
>> >URI-references.
>> 
>> That's odd -- I would call that a behavioral change, since the meaning
>> of the link hasn't changed at all; I only selected one of the ways the
>> link could be satisfied and made it the standard.  Before it was left
>> up to the application.
>
>Fair enough.  So the special interpretation of "#foo" in the resource
>denoted by "http://www.example.com/blargh" is extended to "blargh#foo"
>and "http://www.example.com/blargh#foo" as well.
>
>But it seems to me that (for good or ill) this also means that if a
>base URI is available, say "http://www.example.com/stat/blargh", then
>"#foo" now means "http://www.example.com/stat/blargh#foo".
>
>Is this a correct reading of 2396 bis?


And if John is reading it correctly (he is reading it as I did),
then this is the crux of my problem with it.

paul
Received on Monday, 22 September 2003 11:44:49 UTC

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