Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> supper. Ok, I've no problem with the use of http: being deprecated when > the protocol's not involved, but I don't think this calls for an entirely > new naming scheme or any other drastic action. Yeah, I actually agree. It's not an issue of being draconian; it's just that http: identifiers are generally used to identify things that people think of as hypermedia. And http: identifiers are clearly bound to one specific and limited use-case -- synchronous retrieval via GET over TCP. There is no good reason to extend the range beyond that. People MAY do so; but it's not very smart -- and it sort of defeats the whole purpose of having a scheme in the first place. > Anyhow, I propose a compromise : let's restrict the use of http:// naming > to *within* documents found by that protocol... I'm not sure I understand? I think it is OK to use http: URIs anywhere that URIs of any kind are permitted.
|
