# Re: URLs and Z39.50

Larry Masinter (masinter@parc.xerox.com)
Tue, 29 Nov 1994 13:52:38 PST

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Tom Sears: "subscribe: tsears@csi.compuserve.com"
- Previous message: Roy T. Fielding: "Re: URLs and Z39.50"
- Next in thread: Roy T. Fielding: "Re: URLs and Z39.50"
- Reply: Roy T. Fielding: "Re: URLs and Z39.50"

    To: fielding@avron.ics.uci.edu

    In-Reply-To: fielding@avron.ics.uci.edu's message of Tue, 29 Nov 1994 09:26:45 -0800 <94Nov29.092646pst.2761@golden.parc.xerox.com>

    Subject: Re: URLs and Z39.50

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

    Message-Id: <94Nov29.135253pst.2760@golden.parc.xerox.com>

    Date: 	Tue, 29 Nov 1994 13:52:38 PST

Richard L. Hudson wrote:

> The other option is to load up the URL with sufficient environment information
> to recreate the server z39.50 environment. Similar things are being done today
> to simulate browsing around relational databases.

And Roy Fielding answered:

> In my opinion, this is not an option. A URL is a resource locator, not
> a protocol. Any information beyond that necessary to identify the location
> and access scheme for the resource should not appear in the URL. Instead,
> such information should be determined dynamically by the client state,
> client and server configuration, and whatever negotiation is supported
> by the protocol.

I think we've taken a pragmatic rather than purist approach to the
question of what should and shouldn't be in URLs, and we could do so
for z39.50, too. If 'recreating the server z39.50 environment' is
necessary to locate the information, then the information needed
should be there.

- Next message: Tom Sears: "subscribe: tsears@csi.compuserve.com"
- Previous message: Roy T. Fielding: "Re: URLs and Z39.50"
- Next in thread: Roy T. Fielding: "Re: URLs and Z39.50"
- Reply: Roy T. Fielding: "Re: URLs and Z39.50"