- From: Armin Herbert <armin.herbert@pyramid.de>
- Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 14:36:53 +0200
- To: www-validator@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I wanted to validate the contents of a page to which I can only connect through an URI of this form: https://user:password@www.example.com:80/foo/bar.html I can understand you don't want to support the user:pass@site scheme .. it's not a (proposed) standard of any kind, if I'm right (please correct me, if not). What I don't understand is why you generally don't support HTTPS URIs (like specified in RFC 2818)? Is it a performance thing? I'm not subscribed to this list, please include armin.herbert@pyramid.de in the CC. Thanks and bye, Armin Herbert -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/L6Tl3RjASR6EuPkRArafAJ9nYTomPD0D0PNOdFOQPYCT2ZFiaACeMwkA n+UfwV3bSynG4mt7fcXv5kc= =vKCf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Tuesday, 5 August 2003 08:42:56 UTC