Re: [Uri-review] Request for review

[Timothy Mcsweeney <[e-mail]>]

text version:
Hi Erik, 

Thank you, I will have another look at my reference to section 3.   
Would you agree that in "https://ietf.org" the colon is not part of the hier-part? 



> On 05/24/2020 2:25 PM Timothy Mcsweeney <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Erik,
> 
> Thank you, I will have another look at my reference to section 3.
> Would you agree that in "https://ietf.org" the colon is not part of the hier-part?
> > On May 24, 2020 at 12:02 PM Erik Wilde < [e-mail]> 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://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: [e-mail] |
> > | http://dret.net/netdret |
> > | http://twitter.com/dret |