W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > November 2005

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

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 19:03:09 +0900
Message-Id: <>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org, uri@w3.org, Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 10 October 2021 22:17:48 UTC