# Re: what good is a URL without type information?

John A. Kunze (jak@violet.berkeley.edu)
Mon, 25 Oct 1993 11:39:50 -0700

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Mitra: "Re: URN definition -- a way out?"
- Previous message: Fred Swartz: "Re: Permanence of URNs"
- Maybe in reply to: Marc Andreessen: "what good is a URL without type information?"
- Next in thread: Fred Swartz: "Re: what good is a URL without type information?"
- Reply: Fred Swartz: "Re: what good is a URL without type information?"

    Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1993 11:39:50 -0700

    From: jak@violet.berkeley.edu (John A. Kunze)

    Message-Id: <199310251839.LAA00777@violet.berkeley.edu>

    To: jcurran@nic.near.net, masinter@parc.xerox.com

    Subject: Re: what good is a URL without type information?

> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1993 01:17:20 -0400
> From: John Curran <jcurran@nic.near.net>
>
> Practically speaking, there's little gained and significant functionality
> lost by not including "type" information in URLs.

The problem is the entire UR* architecture implodes.

This in no way minimizes the importance of "type" discrimination,
which I think we all agree is a very high priority.

-John

- Next message: Mitra: "Re: URN definition -- a way out?"
- Previous message: Fred Swartz: "Re: Permanence of URNs"
- Maybe in reply to: Marc Andreessen: "what good is a URL without type information?"
- Next in thread: Fred Swartz: "Re: what good is a URL without type information?"
- Reply: Fred Swartz: "Re: what good is a URL without type information?"