# Re: mid and cid URLs

Al Gilman (asg@severn.wash.inmet.com)
Wed, 22 Nov 1995 08:44:49 -0500 (EST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Roy T. Fielding: "Re: mid and cid URLs"
- Previous message: Al Gilman: "Re: mid and cid URLs"

    From: asg@severn.wash.inmet.com (Al Gilman)

    Message-Id: <9511221344.AA10095@severn.wash.inmet.com>

    Subject: Re: mid and cid URLs

    To: masinter@parc.xerox.com (Larry Masinter)

    Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 08:44:49 -0500 (EST)

    In-Reply-To: <95Nov21.213728pst.2733@golden.parc.xerox.com> from "Larry Masinter" at Nov 21, 95 09:37:21 pm

To follow up on what Larry Masinter said ...
Why are you arguing this? I don't see what point you're trying to
make. Sure, they could be the same, they could be different. Why do
you care? There are reasons -- maybe not great ones -- for making them
different. But what's the reason for making them the same?
I think that we need to be able to apply a lot of variations on
the mailto: action. Now or eventually. The "Mailserver:" case
is a point in the interior of this region. Putting a point
solution in there that does not fit into a systematic solution
for the more general case will just cause trouble later.
That is why I am arguing for a systematic approach under the
umbrella of one scheme name. It leaves the path clear for more
growth in capability.
Al

- Next message: Roy T. Fielding: "Re: mid and cid URLs"
- Previous message: Al Gilman: "Re: mid and cid URLs"