- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 19:16:55 +0200
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
> It also has a passing mention of the file protocol as an example inn > the > context of when and when not to mention localhost > >>> URIs that identify in relation to the end-user's local context should >>> only be used when the context itself is a defining aspect of the >>> resource, such as when an on-line Linux manual refers to a file on >>> the end-user's filesystem (e.g., "file:///etc/hosts"). > > Does this mean that > > a) file is defined in RFC 1738 > b) file is not defined formally, as RFC 2396 obseleted RFC 1738 > c) Someone else has defined it and I missed it > d) whatever <$browser> does > > Given the importance of filesystem access for a lot of processing on > client and server, and the importance of using URI consistently for all > types of access, I was interested to know the correct answer. 1738 hasn't been obsoleted yet for that reason. It is an internet-draft being worked on via the uri@w3.org list. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoffman-rfc1738bis-02.txt I think several people have suggested splitting them into separate drafts per scheme, but I don't know the status -- most of that stuff is waiting on me to finish 2396bis. ....Roy
Received on Tuesday, 29 June 2004 13:17:05 UTC