[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 21:11:01 -0400
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B6C3@HQ5>

[Bullard, Claude L (Len)]

> Really?  Test it.
>
> uri:xx:yyy returns
>
> "The page cannot be displayed
> The page you are looking for might have been removed or had its name
changed.
>

Depends.  Mozilla mungs the uri and finds something at
http://www.uri.com/netscape.htm

Opera says "The address type is unknown or unsupported".

Gibson's ID Serve utility says
"The domain name specified in the URL is invalid. Please check the URL you
are submitting."

wget on Win2000 says this:

[d:\4nt301]wget uri:xx:yyy
--21:07:48--  ftp://uri/xx%3Ayyy
           => `xx:yyy'
Connecting to uri:21...
uri: Host not found

Sort of interesting to see how the different designers figured out what to
do, but I do not count any of these as dereferencing. Do you?  Nor the 404
you brought into prominence.

Cheers,

Tom P

• References:
  • RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce with James Clark)
• Next by Date: RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pace with James Clark)
• Previous by thread: RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce
• Next by thread: Re: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread