# Re: gopher+ support in the URL draft.

Dirk Herr-Hoyman (hoymand@joe.uwex.edu)
Thu, 10 Mar 94 08:08:38 -0600

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: John A. Kunze: "Re: The use of "?" in URLs"
- Previous message: Mark P. McCahill: "Re: The use of "?" in URLs"
- Maybe in reply to: Mark P. McCahill: "gopher+ support in the URL draft."
- Next in thread: Mark P. McCahill: "Re: gopher+ support in the URL draft."

    Date: Thu, 10 Mar 94 08:08:38 -0600

    Message-Id: <9403101408.AA17848@joe.uwex.edu>

    To: "Mark P. McCahill" <mpm@boombox.micro.umn.edu>, uri@bunyip.com

    From: hoymand@joe.uwex.edu (Dirk Herr-Hoyman)

    Subject: Re: gopher+ support in the URL draft.

Mark, Thank for your thoughtfull explainations of why you have changed the
gopher and gopher+ URLs, and as to whether we should have a uniform search
syntax. I as I probe these questions, kinda like a sore tooth in my mouth
:-), I hear myself flip/flopping back and forth as to whether a uniform
syntax is a good idea.

But, let me get back to your proposal. There is another sore tooth there
for me, the search field.

> At 7:17 PM 3/7/94 -0600, Mark P. McCahill wrote:
>...
>So, the format of a Gopher URL path refering to a gopher type "T" item is:
>
>gopher://host [port]/T[gopher_selector]%09[search_string]%09[gopher+_string]
>

Why can't you just let the opaque string be, in fact, the gopher0/gopher+
selector, with escaped tabs (and spaces and ...)? Just plain old:

gopher://host [port]/T[gopher_selector]

The search gets done with the tab, but now it's not a null field for any
non-searches. And you just tack on the gopher+ field, like your examples
(and thank you for adding these, very helpful) show. If it works for the
gopher server, it should work here too, right?

- Next message: John A. Kunze: "Re: The use of "?" in URLs"
- Previous message: Mark P. McCahill: "Re: The use of "?" in URLs"
- Maybe in reply to: Mark P. McCahill: "gopher+ support in the URL draft."
- Next in thread: Mark P. McCahill: "Re: gopher+ support in the URL draft."