Re: URL-Reference / "empty URL" question

Klaus Weide <kweide@tezcat.com> Tue, 13 May 1997 05:26 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa07800; 13 May 97 1:26 EDT
Received: from services.Bunyip.Com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa02410; 13 May 97 1:26 EDT
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by services.bunyip.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA09069 for uri-out; Tue, 13 May 1997 01:16:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mocha.bunyip.com (mocha.Bunyip.Com [192.197.208.1]) by services.bunyip.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA09063 for <uri@services.bunyip.com>; Tue, 13 May 1997 01:16:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from huitzilo.tezcat.com (kweide@huitzilo.tezcat.com [204.128.247.17]) by mocha.bunyip.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA18366 for <uri@bunyip.com>; Tue, 13 May 1997 01:16:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (kweide@localhost) by huitzilo.tezcat.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/tezcat-96091001) with SMTP id AAA14266; Tue, 13 May 1997 00:16:41 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 00:16:40 -0500 (CDT)
From: Klaus Weide <kweide@tezcat.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
cc: fielding@ics.uci.edu, uri@bunyip.com
Subject: Re: URL-Reference / "empty URL" question
In-Reply-To: <3377F594.1FB5@parc.xerox.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95.970513000532.4602B-100000@huitzilo.tezcat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-uri@bunyip.com
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 12 May 1997, Larry Masinter wrote:

> >  <A NAME=link-1" HREF="http://a.host/a.file.html"    >link one   </A>
> >  <A NAME=link-2" HREF="http://a.host/a.file.html#top">link two   </A>
> >  <A NAME=link-3" HREF="#top"                         >link three </A>
> > 
> 
> > (At least with the Lynx code currently under development,) activating
> > ("following") link-1 will result in a new network request.  Activating
> > link-3 will not, but will just change the view of the current document,
> 
> We actually discussed this at length, and came to the design that
> we intended to write, where (as you assert) link-2 is similar to
> link-1 and not link-3, and should cause a new "dereference".
> 
> The way I think of this, link 3 doesn't
> doesn't refer to "the resource at the URL of this document" but really
> "my local copy in this here buffer, file://localhost/blah/".
> 
> I haven't figured out how to make this any clearer in the draft, though.

I found it clear enough - AFTER forcing myself to forget everything
about RFC 1808 and other things (including code)... 
 
> > My reading of the draft is that they do not resolve to the same thing,
> > and that implementing things this way (first "resolve" a given
> > URL-Reference into a "full" URL-Reference with a non-empty absolute
> > URL, then do all further processing with that) actually contradicts
> > the draft - although it probably is used by a lot of implementations.
> 
> Are you sure? I suppose we need to survey interoperable implementations
> to see.

It is just a guess, but it seems likely that all or most things derived
from the CERN/W3C Library would work that way.

   Klaus