- From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 21:42:36 -0700
- To: <michaelm@netsol.com>, "Aaron Swartz" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>
- Cc: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@akamai.com>, "RDF Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, <uri@w3.org>
URN plug-in sounds interesting. One problem I have always had with the extensibility model of URNs is that (obviously) each new scheme (like nap:, news:, etc.) requires a different piece of code to be written to handle that protocol -- and if you use these URLs in your page, any users that do not (for example) have napster installed will get some ugly error message when trying to click the link. It would be nice for the browser to at least look for the scheme in some registry somewhere and suggest some plugins that the user could install. I must admit I have been very tempted to just Hijack http:// for this purpose (but I resist). In fact, hijacking http: could allow the functionality of a custom scheme to be provided to people who did not have the plugin or the ability to install it as well -- consider the example of mini-transclusions. Suppose I have a URL like: hilite:808,30:http://www.netcrucible.com/semantic.html which would browse to the specified document, scroll to the 808th character and highlight 30 characters in yellow. This would be useful, right? How many times have you wanted to be able to hyperlink to a *section* of document that doesn't have proper bookmarking? But the problem is in trying to bootstrap this. On the other hand, if you did something like: http://www.hilite.com/hilite/808/30/www.netcrucible.com/semantic.html the actual /hilite vroot on your site could strip apart the request URI and proxy the target page to the user with appropriate highlighting and a great big nag banner that said "if you want your browser to do this highlighting automatically without proxying through us and our annoying advertisers, just download this plugin". For users with the plugin installed, the "special" http URL would be detected before clicking and the browser would just download the target page directly and apply highlighting. The main draw here is that people could then begin using such transclusions in their pages without fear that they would be breaking 99% of the users, and users could get sucked into using this URL scheme without having to commit to using the plugin at first. Well, I think this idea would really offend the purists, but there may be a more "pure" way to address these issues for someone developing a custom protocol handler framework... -----Original Message----- From: Michael Mealling [mailto:michael@bailey.dscga.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 6:55 PM To: Aaron Swartz Cc: Mark Nottingham; RDF Interest; uri@w3.org Subject: Re: URIs / URLs On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 07:01:40PM -0500, Aaron Swartz wrote: > (adding uri@w3.org since they'll probably know better...) > Mark Nottingham <mnot@akamai.com> wrote: > >> (b) support for [URNs] is available in popular browsers and has > >> been for several generations > > > > Just curious - how do browsers support URNs? I didn't follow URN > > development closely, but always thought that it was poorly supported. > > Me too -- I'd also be curious on what it does with the URIs, and how it > knows what to do (hard coded or does it look it up somehow?). Only recently have browsers gotten the idea that URI schemes need to be extensible (I.E. was one of the first to get it right). Currently they all require a plugin of some type to handle any new schemes (URNs being just one scheme amongst many). We are releasing a much more robust URN plugin for I.E. at the end of this month (LGPL license). URN support in browsers is sketchy at best (mainly because they thought there was a standard when there wasn't). Netscape prior to 6.0 will attempt to send all URNs to its configured http proxy. I.E. will just tell you there's no such URI scheme handler. I'm not sure about Konquerer, and others (Opera is based on Netscape). My hope is that the URI resolution services that are based on DDDS will provide a mechanism for gatewaying to new URI schemes even if the current application doesn't support them natively. Part of the problem is that so far the only two people developing URN software has been myself and Justin Couch. Everyone has been sitting on the sidelines expecting it to get done. We are releasing everything as open source so _please_ help us out by grabbing the code and adding on to it and integrating it into other applications. -MM -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- Michael Mealling | Vote Libertarian! | www.rwhois.net/michael Sr. Research Engineer | www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett | ICQ#: 14198821 Network Solutions | www.lp.org | michaelm@netsol.com
Received on Thursday, 12 April 2001 03:02:44 UTC