# Re: URLs, URIs, and references

Brian Capouch (brianc@saintjoe.EDU)
Mon, 24 May 1993 17:52:56 -0700 (PDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Larry Masinter: "Re: URLs, URIs, and references"
- Previous message: Peter Deutsch: "Re: URLs, URIs, and references"
- In reply to: Larry Masinter: "URLs, URIs, and references"
- Next in thread: Erik Ostrom: "Re: URLs, URIs, and references"
- Reply: Erik Ostrom: "Re: URLs, URIs, and references"

    Message-Id: <4g0Krce3LE06QshF0u@saintjoe.edu>

    Date: Mon, 24 May 1993 17:52:56 -0700 (PDT)

    From: Brian Capouch <brianc@saintjoe.EDU>

    To: uri@bunyip.com

    Subject: Re: URLs, URIs, and references

    In-Reply-To: <93May23.220629pdt.2741@golden.parc.xerox.com>

Excerpts from mail: 23-May-93 URLs, URIs, and references Larry
Masinter@parc.xero (3059)

> > gopher urls contain a little code at the beginning which
> indicates the type.

Unfortunately, that is only partially true; to discover the complete
type information for a gopher object, one must have access to the
directory entry in which the object resides. For instance, a .gif image
shows up in a directory as being of type "I," but the object selector
(-->URL) has the prefix "9," which signifies "undifferentiated binary."

I, for one, am coming around more every day to the notion of ditching
gopher+, settling on a uniform type distinction for both the object and
its directory entry (i.e., both the selector and the directory entry
would be of type "I") and building what I need on top of plain ole
gopher.

- Next message: Larry Masinter: "Re: URLs, URIs, and references"
- Previous message: Peter Deutsch: "Re: URLs, URIs, and references"
- In reply to: Larry Masinter: "URLs, URIs, and references"
- Next in thread: Erik Ostrom: "Re: URLs, URIs, and references"
- Reply: Erik Ostrom: "Re: URLs, URIs, and references"