Re: [Uri-review] Request for review
Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com> Thu, 28 May 2020 00:05 UTC
Return-Path: <tim@dropnumber.com>
X-Original-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 912D23A0DD4 for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 May 2020 17:05:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.695
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.695 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mcsmK2PbeRF0 for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 May 2020 17:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32E1E3A0DD0 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 May 2020 17:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oxusgaltgw10.schlund.de ([10.72.72.56]) by mrelay.perfora.net (mreueus002 [74.208.5.2]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MbfKV-1jLCHS1kyD-00Iyi6 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2020 02:05:11 +0200
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 20:05:11 -0400
From: Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com>
Reply-To: Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com>
To: uri-review@ietf.org
Message-ID: <1081815563.141711.1590624311343@email.ionos.com>
In-Reply-To: <BL0PR2101MB102738EF50D7C8AD647E10BBA3B20@BL0PR2101MB1027.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
References: <491516506.246380.1589851279474@email.ionos.com> <5EC9B257.31362.CC5E003@dan.tobias.name> <1783049000.100771.1590323508943@email.ionos.com> <5ECA8A94.23977.101292FE@dan.tobias.name> <1426881880.158099.1590335585858@email.ionos.com> <94368b41-c15b-da2c-421d-fdd9300be6e9@dret.net> <1310141163.159340.1590344745080@email.ionos.com> <BL0PR2101MB102738EF50D7C8AD647E10BBA3B20@BL0PR2101MB1027.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.1-Rev31
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:ndcGDGK/DTq0ii+pnD49OjZd8G3arrbysUa3uGB81B0Qsg9kudJ CJwdBHt5ryUsHfohMdPadFtDtssY6wLSWtN5p0JIotyLJU1l97Jswldci3tf7IVrQPbIUOi xfxE1gCN680bEhocJjBSHs3b1HweAfTjedc2EIOLhadjD8AaqGz4z9O32u2uolX1Z/rkGJc p6b8kn5uAGWEJXP/If37A==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:6D0M3gXd1EY=:v+xTbseXg/Z/Tw/8+/kcl3 5g4dmWjabw7ly2iSABe13m/VbNRT8BAiq+2UInKE9h8joIehhOTruWcrhMMBwmqTRBF2I89a2 N++qrS1iwSh/NpX0hbWquT7URXHjm34l7K5TJccq1P2FkxMMagQxMiK1cSLzTes6ixLsiABj0 5Zqrq6F+l622un/24J3A5D8J39/GkwiYi8SrbAjxlEQgx6CBglQSn1RSb0qhf7a10GpFSKqby R/iVnh5y8DLUowR36vDUB07Ma1o0PHOZM3XZDFEYE5p3QPhMqnNVfESciwBFGe5sCj+QdODKN eALzIbBFnaY1fWh050zFEwmlf54MZQ/6NhOxvcfRt8zQPErU+iSslubflFTwcmYBXpzddAymg Ev2a5kYe5Fb6sfHwfPHcxNdZObQYRQ5VjKJrV+MI+PXrTGet9+hF/FflH+MwEPMSOkrp3UBSd 7wBf4UwJ2Ju/z+ZjH7C2KmJjLlemTZG1pKjbHSf5x7BfaPXrpRfXnZ7fvtNbcNsBZGOu4lWou 5iEWjgROapHuSWgIE/fQe5BVRWEBl3m3rNw3f5omeFooMzxfLqW/8TxuiE/J5XlVJyKr81pfU sKc//9ikVx/pHZcFll3otGV6JECZibSYYFdX944zTjC4/w0F27bRHRmjor+MXkxJC5fcb1RaB A/iovbjF6JjzBYlVxXo/ipagvNIsyaeWJvACQ6rCyWLhKOw/HEHUpOOmRX+X9FCLeeJB5+IDj d+b1YHdM5EecUhmKkX+MBwUv4zHU0TxySmHrLNuT+0oC91NORA7/Hid7IkTW+Po9O0IxME6rr YM58VUESjVt9pNF03r5JhT4PkzqlCnJEvJQyQ9bXd6/vwywLHdUTE7lcrRM8ArskicZOvw9
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uri-review/0mpCDGXZLTO6uDVicaxjNk5r48E>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Request for review
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/uri-review/>
List-Post: <mailto:uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 00:05:14 -0000
On May 24, 2020 at 6:08 PM Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com> wrote:
Hi Tim,
Correct the colon is not part of the hier-part, the hier-part is what comes after the colon. RFC 3986 says:
URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]
Only strings that conform to the above are URIs.
So “drop#sd54g54” is not a URI because it does not conform to the above syntax, as it has no “:”
“drop:sd54g54” on the other hand would be a valid URI.
This is what folks are saying when they say if you just change the “#” to a “:” in your draft then it becomes legal.
Dave
From: Uri-review <uri-review-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Timothy Mcsweeney
Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 11:26 AM
To: Erik Wilde <erik.wilde@dret.net>; uri-review@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Request for review
Hi Erik,
Thank you, I will have another look at my reference to section 3.
Would you agree that in "https://ietf.org" rel="nofollow">https://ietf.org" the colon is not part of the hier-part?
On May 24, 2020 at 12:02 PM Erik Wilde < erik.wilde@dret.net> wrote:
hey tim.
On 2020-05-24 17:53, Timothy Mcsweeney wrote:
Yes, I agree and understand that the same way as you. But when the "#"
leaves the client it is not leaving as a fragment,
what people are telling you is that "#" and anything following it never
leaves the client, by definition.
it is leaving as a
way to separate the URI components, <scheme> and <path> or for http it
would be separating <scheme> and <authority>. It is this that makes me
believe that even if the colon is required for http resolution, it is
not necessarily required for all URI.
this discussion could be more productive if you had a brief look at the
specs you're depending on. the very first rule shown in
https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Frfc3986%23section-3&data=02%7C01%7Cdthaler%40microsoft.com%7C301845b79f34417b8da108d8000ffe6c%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637259415988523425&sdata=8SdFPIQPmfPOefEYg%2Fy13BK0AMhxkW6g55TE5MAJ2pY%3D&reserved=0" rel="noopener nofollow">https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3 is
URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]
each URI is defined like this and must have a colon.
cheers,
dret.
--
erik wilde | mailto: erik.wilde@dret.net |
| https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdret.net%2Fnetdret&data=02%7C01%7Cdthaler%40microsoft.com%7C301845b79f34417b8da108d8000ffe6c%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637259415988523425&sdata=AsAJT%2BzCdftgNtsB3tJr7Yj7hTBe8%2BES%2BHLi7QMUudg%3D&reserved=0" rel="noopener nofollow"> http://dret.net/netdret |
| https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdret&data=02%7C01%7Cdthaler%40microsoft.com%7C301845b79f34417b8da108d8000ffe6c%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637259415988533419&sdata=P%2FHldqxET0s4Ka1%2BYCw9xaHlCrItXJ9ko8rwHa%2B0Mag%3D&reserved=0" rel="noopener nofollow"> http://twitter.com/dret |
- [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Henry S. Thompson
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Ted Hardie
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Daniel R. Tobias
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Daniel R. Tobias
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Daniel R. Tobias
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Daniel R. Tobias
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Erik Wilde
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Dave Thaler
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Dave Thaler
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Dave Thaler
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Graham Klyne
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Ted Hardie
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Graham Klyne
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Michael Wojcik
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Michael Wojcik
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Daniel R. Tobias
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Larry Masinter
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Thomas Fruin
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Henry S. Thompson
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Daniel R. Tobias
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney
- Re: [Uri-review] Request for review Timothy Mcsweeney