- From: Charles Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 16:47:38 -0000
- To: URI <uri@w3.org>
On Thu, 06 Jan 2011 16:36:23 -0000, John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org> wrote: > Charles Lindsey scripsit: > >> If the authority identifies a host (e.g. e domain name with a A record, >> or some local name known from /etc/hosts) > > Well, Internet Explorer interprets file://foo/bar/baz as the UNC name > \\foo\bar\baz, which strikes me as extremely sensible, and I wish every > browser on Windows did it. (Chrome does, Firefox doesn't.) Technically > "foo" is not a hostname but the published name of an externally exposed > portion of a file tree. That looks like a typical microsoft non-standard invention. It is certainly not in the spirit of the main URI standard, and it was not the intention of RFC 1738. And how do you indicate that 'foo' really IS a host name, as intended by 1738? It seems like an aberration we should not give any official support to. > >> then the question is whether the open command in that host understands >> "blah-blah-blah". > > No doubt, but how does one find out? Lynx uses anonymous FTP if the > hostname is not empty or "localhost"; is that conformant, given that > anonymous FTP typically has its own root? Well the file scheme is not supposed to be an alternative to the ftp scheme. Given that 1738 was written with local networks in mind rather than the global internet, then I think file:/host/filename... should normally be seen as an invitation to mount that file from that host using NFS. -- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clerew.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
Received on Friday, 7 January 2011 16:48:12 UTC