W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > April 2010

Re: URI length statistics "in the wild"?

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 11:59:04 +1000
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-Id: <E50119E4-521C-4BAF-87D6-486CF120879E@mnot.net>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Somewhat related, see <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-09#section-4.1.2>, last paragraph.


On 08/04/2010, at 8:06 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:

> 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

Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 9 April 2010 01:59:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:14 UTC