# Re: what good is a URL without type information?

Mitra (mitra@path.net)
Sat, 23 Oct 1993 18:06:18 GMT

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Marc Andreessen: "what good is a URL without type information?"
- Previous message: Jon Knight: "Re: Proposed solution to url: prefix problem"
- Maybe in reply to: Marc Andreessen: "what good is a URL without type information?"
- Next in thread: John A. Kunze: "Re: what good is a URL without type information?"

    From: mitra@path.net (Mitra)

    Subject: Re: what good is a URL without type information?

    Message-Id: <CFD3MJ.C0@pandora.sf.ca.us>

    Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1993 18:06:18 GMT

Larry,

You are right - Type information is crucial to any kind of retrieval. The
mistake is not moving type information out of URL's, but in putting off
the URM so long.

Note - as a little sidebar - the Type information given in Gopher+ is
frequently wrong, since in Gopher+ a selector string can refer to any of
the formats the document is available in. The Gopher0 type that is sent
with the selector to the client is the type of the first version of the
document the server finds in the directory. (By order in the directory,
not alphabetical order :-).

- Mitra

- Next message: Marc Andreessen: "what good is a URL without type information?"
- Previous message: Jon Knight: "Re: Proposed solution to url: prefix problem"
- Maybe in reply to: Marc Andreessen: "what good is a URL without type information?"
- Next in thread: John A. Kunze: "Re: what good is a URL without type information?"