Re: non-HTTP URIs in HTTP requests

John Cowan writes:

> Why not?  If you use the Telnet protocol on
> telnet://lambda.moo.mud.org:8888/, you'll get interaction with 
LambdaMOO.

Yes, but my reading is that the URI identifies the interaction service, 
and not the LambdaMOO content available through that service. 

> But if you ask a proxy using the HTTP protocol, a 303 redirecting you
> to http://www.lambdamoo.info/ is perfectly sensible.

My point exactly.  303 seems sensible, but I'm unconvinced that a 200 
would be. 

Noah


--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------








John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Sent by: uri-request@w3.org
01/07/2010 03:40 PM
 
        To:     noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
        cc:     Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>, Jan Algermissen 
<algermissen1971@mac.com>, "uri@w3.org" <uri@w3.org>
        Subject:        Re: non-HTTP URIs in HTTP requests


noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com scripsit:

> "The Telnet URL scheme is used to designate interactive services that 
may 
> be accessed by the Telnet protocol [STD8]."
> 
> So, the telnet URI scheme cannot (by my reading) be used to designate 
blog 
> entries, news reports, or other document-like resources.

Why not?  If you use the Telnet protocol on
telnet://lambda.moo.mud.org:8888/, you'll get interaction with LambdaMOO.
But if you ask a proxy using the HTTP protocol, a 303 redirecting you
to http://www.lambdamoo.info/ is perfectly sensible.

-- 
It was dreary and wearisome.  Cold clammy winter still held way in this
forsaken country.  The only green was the scum of livid weed on the dark
greasy surfaces of the sullen waters.  Dead grasses and rotting reeds 
loomed
up in the mists like ragged shadows of long-forgotten summers.
        --"The Passage of the Marshes"          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan

Received on Thursday, 7 January 2010 20:49:24 UTC