W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > February 2004

RE: fragment prose proposal

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 13:41:15 -0800
To: uri@w3.org
Message-id: <0HTV00E4V8922S@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>

The RFC 2396 definition for fragments allows URI implementations
to assume that the URI can be separated from its fragment,
the URI handed off to a separate URI access mechanism, and
the fragment applied after the results have been accessed,
without reference to the scheme or any of the other components
of the URI.

This is a reasonable assumption, works well for schemes that
have associated GET semantics, including "file", "ftp",
"http", "data", "cid" and many others.

Allowing schemes to define scheme-specific fragment interpretations
would be a mistake.

> Might it be impertinent to suggest that these document represent a legacy
> view on the function of fragment identifiers in URIs? 

The document in question is attempting to move from "DRAFT STANDARD"
to "STANDARD", and a legacy view is appropriate.

Received on Sunday, 29 February 2004 16:41:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:07 UTC