W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > August 2007

Re: URI Templates - optional variables?

From: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 17:24:59 +0200
Message-Id: <2CAD67E4-0BFF-4095-8BA5-C6AA65151F74@greenbytes.de>
Cc: uri@w3.org
To: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>


Am 01.08.2007 um 16:47 schrieb Marc Hadley:

> On Aug 1, 2007, at 3:26 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>> A.) http://www.example.com/
>>> B.) http://www.example.com//
>>
>> Clearly A. The path resolution will always make conversions such as:
>>
>> //  ->  /
>> /./  ->  /
>> /a/../b -> /b
>>
> Looking at the referenced sections its not clear to me that // gets  
> converted to /. Can you point me to the step in the algorithm that  
> would accomplish that ?

That will be difficult. I just checked the spec and then my code (and  
2396 which was valid when i wrote it). Clearly i was dreaming when I  
implemented the reduction "//" to "/". Path segments can be empty.

I apologize to the list.

So Mike's request to have a way to map to outcome B.) is not solved  
by path normalization. Since both "http://www.example.com/" and  
"http://www.example.com//" are valid URIs and not equivalent under  
any definition, it needs an extra modifier like the '?' to express  
the difference to a template parser.

The question remains how to best address this. When this was  
discussed initially, there had been lots of proposals for  
"operators", each with good arguments and use case. But how much of  
it needs to be part of the spec?

//Stefan

--
Stefan Eissing

<green/>bytes GmbH
Hafenweg 16
D-48155 Münster
Germany
Amtsgericht Münster: HRB5782
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2007 15:25:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:11 UTC