# Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix

Randy Bush (randy@psg.com)
Fri, 3 Dec 1993 08:12:12 -0800 (PST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: David Robison: "Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix"
- Previous message: Tim Berners-Lee: "Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix"
- In reply to: Tim Berners-Lee: "Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix"

    Message-Id: <m0p5d76-000308C@rip.psg.com>

    From: randy@psg.com (Randy Bush)

    Subject: Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix

    To: timbl@nxoc01.cern.ch

    Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1993 08:12:12 -0800 (PST)

    In-Reply-To: <9312030955.AA00895@www3.cern.ch> from "Tim Berners-Lee" at Dec 3, 93 10:55:43 am

>>> How about suggesting that in an RFC822 header context
>>> that a specific header be used for URLs?
>>> Newsgroups: ietf.neverending.uri
>>> URL: ftp://myhost/dir/file
>>> Date: 1997 Mar 31 21:67
>>>
>>> but leave the URL syntax unencumbered.
>> Useless. The article is not a URL, part of its content may be. And there
>> may be multiple URLs within the content, each with some associated context.
> This is an example of an article which HAS a URL appart from the
> one with which accesses it as news. I am saying that "URL:" is
> apprpriate when a mail header is to be formed, but otherwise
> not. It shouldn't be part of the URL.

I am confused, so please bear with me.

In what way do you mean 'HAS a URL'?

I doubt you mean 'this article is identified by a URL as opposed to a
Message-Id:' as your statement seems to intentionally preclude that, and
your example URL uses the ftp protocol.

I doubt you mean, 'the body of this article refers to a URL' for the
reasons above. More than one URL could be referenced by an article. And
why would one want to flag this fact with a new RFC1036 header field anyway?

So I am left thinking maybe that you are trying to tell me that 'the body of
the article does not follow, but may be retrieved by following the URL.'

Maybe I need another cup of coffee.

randy

- Next message: David Robison: "Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix"
- Previous message: Tim Berners-Lee: "Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix"
- In reply to: Tim Berners-Lee: "Re: Minor clarification on url: prefix"