# Re: File Type/Directory Annotation for FTP URL Spec

Larry Masinter (masinter@parc.xerox.com)
Mon, 29 Nov 1993 23:56:29 PST

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Mitra: "Re: a better ftp URL"
- Previous message: Larry Masinter: "DRAFT urn requirements section"
- Next in thread: Marshall Rose: "Re: File Type/Directory Annotation for FTP URL Spec"
- Reply: Marshall Rose: "Re: File Type/Directory Annotation for FTP URL Spec"

    To: robison@nwnet.net

    In-Reply-To: robison@nwnet.net's message of Mon, 29 Nov 1993 18:35:07 -0800 <93Nov29.183510pst.2732@golden.parc.xerox.com>

    Subject: Re: File Type/Directory Annotation for FTP URL Spec

    From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>

    Message-Id: <93Nov29.235636pst.2732@golden.parc.xerox.com>

    Date: 	Mon, 29 Nov 1993 23:56:29 PST

The proposal makes the transfer type optional. What is the
interpretation when it is left out?

Is the default type for FTP to be 'ascii', 'binary', 'unspecified', or
'heuristic'?

Right now it is 'heuristic': i.e., if you don't say, the client
guesses. Is that to remain?

- Next message: Mitra: "Re: a better ftp URL"
- Previous message: Larry Masinter: "DRAFT urn requirements section"
- Next in thread: Marshall Rose: "Re: File Type/Directory Annotation for FTP URL Spec"
- Reply: Marshall Rose: "Re: File Type/Directory Annotation for FTP URL Spec"