W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > October 2006

Re: Template URIs vs. URIs

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 18:21:01 -0700
Message-Id: <610D033F-1028-46EA-96E3-265B5F5D1F43@gbiv.com>
Cc: uri@w3.org
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>

On Oct 5, 2006, at 5:40 PM, Mark Baker wrote:

> As I mentioned, users could be confused about what's actually intended
> to be a link in an email or a Web page.
>
> Spiders could be similarly confused, and as a result, waste time
> chasing down links that aren't really links.

In both cases, a correctly written parser will not do that (or will
truncate the URI before the first open brace.  An incorrectly written
parser will do what you indicate regardless of the syntax chosen.

These templates are not going to be sent on email or appear in
normal publications aside from the specification (except by accident),
so there is no point in protecting against casual contact.

All of the URI specs have specifically excluded braces from the
syntax, partly because it was anticipated that we would need a
syntax for variable substitution some day.  It makes perfect sense
to use them for this purpose.  I am not sure if it makes sense to
do this as an IETF standard, though, since I don't see this as a
protocol element for Internet communications.  However, a standard
would definitely be better than multiple syntaxes.

Personally, I would prefer to include the parameter expansion syntax
that is available in bash.  {parameter:=default} is very useful.

....Roy
Received on Friday, 6 October 2006 01:21:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:10 UTC