On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 danielv at netvision.net.il wrote:

> Well, StP also said it should be just "module:/..." to accomodate other
> actions. OTOH, I don't think I know of a case where a url is defined as
> having many meanings. There's mailto, there's no "mail". 

The scheme of a URI can be such as to have many actions associated with
it, e.g., http has GET, PUT, POST, DELETE (an more) methods. It's the
associated protocol that matters.

The *URL* doesn't have many meanings, per se, http://www.google.com/ means
there is an HTTP accessible location/resoruce at "/" at host
www.google.com.

'loadmodule' is exactly wrong, IMHO. module or squeakmodule may be better,
though I'd prefer to do a bit more thinking before we hack the URI
space. Making Squeak images, and their componants URI named is a good
thing, imho, and goes way beyond modules.


> Heck, I'm not sure.
> 
> What do you think?

Something confusedly like above ;)

Cheers,
Bijan Parsia.