Re: BOF in San Diego?

At 18:36 12/07/04 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote:
>Since there are a number of URI documents making various
>kinds of progress through the IETF, perhaps there's enough
>interest in a BOF to discuss them in San Diego?

I'll not be there but, FWIW and based on my implementation experience, I 
think RFC2396bis is generally in pretty good shape.

I've made some comments on the IRI draft, and I think Martin has responded 
appropriately.

I also think it would be good to see the file: scheme specification 
proceed, and would like to see some guidance (maybe informative?) there 
about mapping from different (common) file naming systems into URI-space.

I've done some implementation work recently that figures a URI from a 
filename and vice versa.  For Unix-like systems, I think the correspondence 
is pretty clear, but for Windows I needed to engage in some guesswork about 
how to deal with device (drive) names.  Part of my code looks like this:
[[
     -- strip off leading '/' from Windows drive name
     source      = fileuripath (path uri)
     fileuripath ('/':file@(d:':':more)) | driveLetter d = file
     fileuripath file = file
     driveLetter d = d `elem` ['A'..'Z']
]]
That is, on windows systems,  FILE://localhost/D:/dir/file is treated as a 
reference to file D:\dir\file on the current host system.   But other 
software I have seen in the past uses '|' in place of the ':'.  I'm not 
sure what is the current preferred approach.

#g
--

At 18:36 12/07/04 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote:
>Since there are a number of URI documents making various
>kinds of progress through the IETF, perhaps there's enough
>interest in a BOF to discuss them in San Diego?
>
>Larry
>--
>http://larry.masinter.net

------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact

Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2004 03:51:41 UTC