From: Michael.Mealling@oit.gatech.edu (Michael Mealling)
Message-Id: <199409151931.PAA05252@oit.gatech.edu>
Subject: Re: The <URL: Wrapper take 2
To: clw@mocha.bunyip.com (Chris Weider)
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 15:31:28 -0400 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <9409151525.AA24457@mocha.bunyip.com> from "Chris Weider" at Sep 15, 94 11:25:44 am
Chris Weider said this:
> Larry:
> I think I'm going to be a hard nosed dude here: This is the first objection
>I've seen publicly raised to an issue that in my mind was settled more than
>a year ago, I haven't seen any compelling arguments against wrappers
> (sorry Dan) and I've already done my compromising on this :^) I think
> we should leave it in.
I second this. Most of the objections have been that it doesn't currently
work with any existing code. That's not the purpose of an RFC. If we
wanted to rubber stamp current web practice then we would never have formed
the URI working group in the first place. Currently its in the Appendix and we
have concensus of over 99% of the folx on the list. I even have a version
of Mosaic that does handle the URL: if the user puts it in there. It ended
up only being two additional lines of code.
-MM
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <HR><A HREF="http://www.gatech.edu/michael.html"> <ADDRESS>Michael Mealling</ADDRESS> <ADDRESS>michael.mealling@oit.gatech.edu</ADDRESS></A>