- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:21:10 -0500
- To: EF <energyflow@energyflow.com>
- CC: www-html@w3.org, uri@w3.org
(a) I suggest that uri@w3.org is a more appropriate forum http://www.w3.org/Addressing/#discussion http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/ and (b) I believe this request was considered and declined during the development of the URI spec, RFC2396, though I don't have specific pointers handy. I think libwww used to implement it... the part about scheme1://auth1/path1 + scheme2:/path2 = scheme2://auth1/path2 This is the first time (I think) that it's been proposed to allow: scheme1://auth1/path11/path12 + scheme2:../path2 = scheme2://auth1/path11/path2 In any case, I doubt you're going to get a change to the relative URI parsing algorithm at this stage. It's just too widely deployed. oh... and (c) note that this sort of syntactic manipulation of URIs is scheme-independent. It's handled the same way for http, ftp, mailto, news:, etc. EF wrote: [...] > If I am on a non-secure page, to link to a secure page, I could use: > > <A HREF="https:/members/login.htm"> > > This would keep me on my same webserver, but switch the transfer protocol to > secure mode. > > Likewise, if I am on a secure page and I wish to switch to non-secure mode, > I could use: > > <A HREF="http:/info/contact.htm"> -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 20 June 2000 16:22:22 UTC