# Vote for 'URL' prefix

Fred Swartz (fred.swartz@umich.edu)
Thu, 02 Dec 1993 11:36:38 -0500

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Chris Weider: "Re: question"
- Previous message: Farhad Anklesaria: "Re: Vote for 'URL' prefix"
- In reply to: Tim Berners-Lee: "Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix"
- Next in thread: Farhad Anklesaria: "Re: Vote for 'URL' prefix"
- Maybe reply: Farhad Anklesaria: "Re: Vote for 'URL' prefix"

    Message-Id: <9312021636.AA05136@merit.edu>

    To: timbl@nxoc01.cern.ch

    From: "Fred Swartz" <fred.swartz@umich.edu>

    Subject: Vote for 'URL' prefix

    In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 02 Dec 1993 11:53:21 +0100."

                 <9312021053.AA02421@www3.cern.ch>

    Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1993 11:36:38 -0500

> From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@www3.cern.ch>
...
>Could those with strong views raise their
>hands perhaps? A for or against hand? To get this "rough consensus"
>straight...

This is a medium vote FOR the 'URL' prefix.

Rationale: All the standard arguments. In addition, there is confusion
about whether URN and others in the Uxx series is only parallel to URN,
or may/must be a part of a URL. Eg, would "URL: URN: ..." mean that
the URN was to be evaluated in a URL context and therefore yield its
URL attributes? While the simplest uses of URLs are unambiguous, I
suspect that future Internet referential expressions will benefit from
explicit typing (ie, the use of the URL prefix).

-- Fred (fred.swartz@merit.edu)

- Next message: Chris Weider: "Re: question"
- Previous message: Farhad Anklesaria: "Re: Vote for 'URL' prefix"
- In reply to: Tim Berners-Lee: "Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix"
- Next in thread: Farhad Anklesaria: "Re: Vote for 'URL' prefix"
- Maybe reply: Farhad Anklesaria: "Re: Vote for 'URL' prefix"