Re: I-D ACTION:draft-fenner-literal-zone-02.txt

Hello Roy,

At 05:58 05/11/08, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
 >On Nov 7, 2005, at 2:04 AM, Martin Duerst wrote:

 >> In the latest version of the draft, v1. is used. I think my
 >> original proposal was to use v6., because we are talking about
 >> IPv6. Roy, others, what was the original intention for the vX.
 >> syntax? IP version, or just a sequential id?
 >v1 should be used.  This is the second IPv6 form and there may
 >be others in the future -- the v has nothing to do with IPv.

Thanks for this clarification. Sorry I got this wrong.

 >> The URI community has a lot of experience with URIs leaking
 >> (the first experience was that URIs themselves were not
 >> intended for end-user consumption).
 >What?  Of course they were intended for user consumption -- where
 >on earth did you get that idea?  There are whole sections on
 >transcription in the URI spec.

Well, I have to admit that I got that from Tim Berners-Lee himself.
He was probably talking about the time around 1990 or even earlier,
long before there was an URI spec.

Regards,   Martin. 

Received on Tuesday, 8 November 2005 10:26:41 UTC