While I'm at it...(Re: [BUG]? FileDirectory>>directoryContentsFor:)

Ted Wright wright at en.com
Fri Mar 16 21:17:23 UTC 2001


Bert Freudenberg <bert at isg.cs.uni-magdeburg.de> wrote:
>No again. The "//" is *not* part of the protocol specification. It
>indicates the following part up to next "/" is the host. Usually in file
>URLs you leave out the host part (but it's valid - in Win32 you also have
>the \\host\dir notation). So here you have two absolute URLs:
>"file:///foo/bar" and "file:/foo/bar". 
>
>Btw, it's always okay to specify the protocol, even in a relative URL like
>this: "file:foo/bar".

Does that mean it is impossible to write a relative file URL for 
a file on a different host?

Ted






More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list