- From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 05:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
- To: uri@w3.org, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Hi Dan, I feel your pain. My Web Mail fetched your missive with a GET in (a downright pathological) 515 Bytes. If I might make a suggestion though: Apache may have some hints to the "standards" in their documentation on how to parse server logs. --Gannon --- On Thu, 4/8/10, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote: > From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> > Subject: URI length statistics "in the wild"? > To: uri@w3.org > Date: Thursday, April 8, 2010, 5:06 AM > Hi folks > > Some topics seem peculiarly ill-suited for Web searches - > hence this > mail. I am looking for data on typical lengths of URIs, in > particular > as they're used in the public Web. Breakdown by scheme > would be nice, > but anything would be a start. > > Context for this enquiry is an investigation into the use > of > mechanisms like QR Codes and also audio encodings (eg. > http://github.com/diva/digital-voices/ ) > as a way of passing URIs > around, eg. to a smartphone from a media centre. I'd like > to know > what's out there, what's feasible to encode using these > techniques, > and as well as what the official limits are. In > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986 I don't see much > about URI length > except in the reg-name portion. > > So - what are the official limits? what are the practical > limits (eg. > imposed by common implementations)? Can we say that 99.9% > of URIs in > the public Web are shorter than ...X chars? > > Ideally barcode and audio encodings wouldn't impose > arbitrary limits; > however it would be good to document what's folk can expect > to > encounter, if only for sensible testing of error > correction, reader > accuracy etc. > > Thanks for any pointers, > > Dan > >
Received on Thursday, 8 April 2010 12:20:00 UTC