- From: Adam M. Costello BOGUS address, see signature <BOGUS@BOGUS.nicemice.net>
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 08:03:44 -0500
- To: uri@w3.org
Michel Suignard <michelsu@windows.microsoft.com> wrote: > > Also, since http://jos%C3%A9.net/ violates RFC-2396, > > In which way does it violate RFC-2396? Could you point to the relevant > text? Sorry, I said that wrong. It violates RFC-2616 (HTTP), specifically the parts of RFC-2616 that are incorporated by reference from RFC-2396. RFC-2616: 3.2.1 General Syntax For definitive information on URL syntax and semantics, see "Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax and Semantics," RFC 2396... This specification adopts the definitions of ... "host", ... from that specification. 3.2.2 http URL http_URL = "http:" "//" host [ ":" port ] [ abs_path [ "?" query ]] RFC-2396: A. Collected BNF for URI host = hostname | IPv4address hostname = *( domainlabel "." ) toplabel [ "." ] domainlabel = alphanum | alphanum *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum toplabel = alpha | alpha *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum IPv4address = 1*digit "." 1*digit "." 1*digit "." 1*digit > On the same thread, is there somewhere a formal up-to-date definition > in ABNF for current URI schemes, such as http, mailto, ftp, etc...? http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes Each scheme is defined in its own document, except for the ones that haven't been updated since RFC-1738. AMC http://www.nicemice.net/amc/
Received on Tuesday, 17 February 2004 08:06:39 UTC